search for: interposible

...echristo at gmail.com> > To: "Reid Kleckner" <rnk at google.com>, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 11:34:56 AM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add an "interposible" linkage type (and > implement -fsemantic-interposition) > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 9:15 AM Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > wrote: > > I think that all makes sense. You're just adding the missing > > non-ODR > > conterpart of ...

...ained to > a function outside of the defining library might be different from the > pointer obtained within the defining library). As a result, making this > change might be practically prohibited (even if it makes sense in theory). > > Proposal: > > 1. Add a new linkage type, interposible, which is like external except > that isInterposableLinkage will return true (thus preventing inlining, IPA, > etc.). This is similar to weak linkage, in a sense, except that such > symbols are never discarded and are not marked as weak for linking, etc. > > 2. Add -fsemantic-interp...

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: >> # step A: Introduce an `interposable` function attribute >> >> We can bike shed on the name and the exact specification, but the >> general idea is that you cannot do IPA / IPO over callsites calling >> `interposable` functions without inlining them. This attribute will

> On Jun 14, 2017, at 2:47 PM, Michael Clark via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> >> On 15 Jun 2017, at 6:50 AM, Louis Gerbarg <lgerbarg at apple.com <mailto:lgerbarg at apple.com>> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jun 6, 2017, at 4:08 PM, Michael Clark via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at

...s (i.e. the function pointer obtained to a function outside of the defining library might be different from the pointer obtained within the defining library). As a result, making this change might be practically prohibited (even if it makes sense in theory). Proposal: 1. Add a new linkage type, interposible, which is like external except that isInterposableLinkage will return true (thus preventing inlining, IPA, etc.). This is similar to weak linkage, in a sense, except that such symbols are never discarded and are not marked as weak for linking, etc. 2. Add -fsemantic-interposition/-fno-semantic-in...

Assuming everyone is on the same page, here's a rough high level agenda: # step A: Introduce an `interposable` function attribute We can bike shed on the name and the exact specification, but the general idea is that you cannot do IPA / IPO over callsites calling `interposable` functions without inlining them. This attribute will (usually) have to be used on function bodies that can

...ained to > a function outside of the defining library might be different from the > pointer obtained within the defining library). As a result, making this > change might be practically prohibited (even if it makes sense in theory). > > Proposal: > > 1. Add a new linkage type, interposible, which is like external except > that isInterposableLinkage will return true (thus preventing inlining, IPA, > etc.). This is similar to weak linkage, in a sense, except that such > symbols are never discarded and are not marked as weak for linking, etc. > > 2. Add -fsemantic-interp...

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: >> Part of the challenge here is to specify the attribute in a way that >> allows inlining, but not IPA without inlining. In fact, maybe it is >> best to not call it "interposable" at all? > > > Yea, this is something *very* different from interposable. GCC and other >

----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Y Knight" <jyknight at google.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Sanjoy Das" <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com>, "llvm-dev" > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 9:31:24 AM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Possible soundness issue with

Hi there was a mail a while back on this list about using the LD_PRELOAD feature on Solaris in order to override the location of nsswitch.conf for smbd so only it would use winbindd. I did some digging and came up with the code at the bottom of this mail ( I've overridden every file open call I could find, but I think it's only the _open() call which is actually necessary ). Initial

I''d like to see if we can use DTrace to as the kernel implementation of the BSD systrace security policy system (http://www.systrace.org). I don''t really want to port systrace to Solaris because I think with DTrace we already have all the necessary in kernel hooks to do this. With systrace you express things like: "httpd can bind to port 80 but not any other port, it

> On Mar 11, 2016, at 9:56 AM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:41 AM, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com <mailto:rjmccall at apple.com>> wrote: > Okay, so, it sounds to me like LLVM basically treats strong definitions as protected, then. Should we just formalize that? > > I guess the proposal here would be: > 1.

I want to create my own "[" function (for use on vectors, matrices, arrays, etc.), which calls the stock R "[", does some additional work, and then finally returns the modified result. But, how do I properly call the stock R "[" function? It takes a varying number of positional arguments, and its R-level closure is just: .Primitive("[") It's

+kledzik at apple.com The dynamic runtime is using dylib interposition (google for "__DATA,__interpose). If I'm understanding correctly (Nick, can you please confirm this?) this allows to interpose the function regardless of the two-level namespace. The support for dynamic runtime in ASan is almost there. But the new interposition method has revealed some issues with the allocator which

> On Jun 6, 2017, at 4:08 PM, Michael Clark via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > I’m working on a port of musl libc to macos (arch triple is “x86_64-xnu-musl”) to solve some irreconcilable issues I’m having with libSystem.dylib. I don’t want to use glibc for various reasons, mainly because I want to static link. I have static PIE + ASLR working

> On Mar 11, 2016, at 8:33 AM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:32 PM, John McCall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > I mean, I’ve never really liked ELF’s stance on symbol interposition, but taking it as given, I’m not sure I agree that it’s reasonable to carve out virtual functions

Hi- I am running Samba 2.2.5 on Solaris 8 with winbind and pam configured. I have the following in my nsswitch.conf: passwd: files winbind group: files winbind Now local users on the Solaris 8 machine cannot change there password using the passwd command: Here is the sample output: # passwd michasp1 Enter new password: Enter new password again: Supported configurations for passwd

On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 09:46:09AM -0800, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > +kledzik at apple.com > The dynamic runtime is using dylib interposition (google for > "__DATA,__interpose). > If I'm understanding correctly (Nick, can you please confirm this?) > this allows to interpose the function regardless of the two-level > namespace. > The support for dynamic runtime in

On Feb 26, 2016 8:50 PM, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > *From: *"James Y Knight via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *To: *"Sanjoy Das" <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> > *Cc: *"llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *Sent: *Thursday, February 25, 2016 1:41:43 PM > *Subject: *Re: [llvm-dev]

Howdy. I have a application I'm developing where I need to encrypt the data inside an OGG stream. I will be using a regular block cypher (AES, or others... configurable); and I would like to encrypt the pages in an OGG stream. I'm thinking that if I sit my decrypter in between the reading application and the encrypted file, you should be able to use all the normal seeking