On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 08:05:10PM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> But I still don't see anything _stopping_ the compiler from optimizing
> this better in the future. The "=m" is not a barrier: it just informs
> the compiler that the asm produces an output value in *ptr (and no other
> outputs). If nothing can consume that output, it doesn't stop the
> compiler from freeing the allocation immediately after the asm instead
> of at the end of the function.
Ah, yeah, I get what you mean.
> I'm talking about something like
> asm volatile("" : : "r" (ptr) : "memory");
> which tells the compiler that the asm may change memory arbitrarily.
Yeah, I will adjust it.
> Here, we don't use it really as a barrier, but to tell the compiler that
> the asm may have stashed the value of ptr somewhere in memory, so it's
> not free to reuse the space that it pointed to until the function
> returns (unless it can prove that nothing accesses memory, not just that
> nothing accesses ptr).
--
Kees Cook
