Migrate branch-protection-check-IBT to rmake.rs
#134760
Open
+60
−54
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rustbot
added
A-run-make
jieyouxu
added
S-waiting-on-author
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 25, 2024
…eck-IBT, r=<try> Migrate `branch-protection-check-IBT` to rmake.rs - The Makefile version *never* ran because of Makefile syntax confusion because `ifeq ($(filter x86,$(LLVM_COMPONENTS)),x86_64)` [compares `x86` to `x86_64`, which always evaluates to false](rust-lang#126720 (comment)). - The test would've always failed because precompiled std is not built with `-Z cf-protection=branch`, but linkers require all input object files to indicate IBT support in order to enable IBT for the executable, which is not the case for std. - Thus, the test input file is instead changed to a `no_std` program. The GNU property note was added by rust-lang#110304 in order to address rust-lang#103001. Partially supersedes rust-lang#129156. The rmake.rs port was initially authored by `@Rejyr` in rust-lang#126720. This PR is co-authored with `@Oneirical` and `@Rejyr.` r? `@bjorn3` or reroll try-job: x86_64-msvc try-job: x86_64-apple
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
|
@bors try |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 25, 2024
…eck-IBT, r=<try> Migrate `branch-protection-check-IBT` to rmake.rs - The Makefile version *never* ran because of Makefile syntax confusion because `ifeq ($(filter x86,$(LLVM_COMPONENTS)),x86_64)` [compares `x86` to `x86_64`, which always evaluates to false](rust-lang#126720 (comment)). - The test would've always failed because precompiled std is not built with `-Z cf-protection=branch`, but linkers require all input object files to indicate IBT support in order to enable IBT for the executable, which is not the case for std. - Thus, the test input file is instead changed to a `no_std` program. The GNU property note was added by rust-lang#110304 in order to address rust-lang#103001. Partially supersedes rust-lang#129156. The rmake.rs port was initially authored by `@Rejyr` in rust-lang#126720. This PR is co-authored with `@Oneirical` and `@Rejyr.` r? `@bjorn3` or reroll try-job: x86_64-msvc try-job: x86_64-apple-1 try-job: x86_64-apple-2
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
|
... Right. |
jieyouxu
force-pushed
the
enable-branch-protection-check-IBT
branch
from
5871cee to
5cd8653
Compare
|
@bors try |
|
⌛ Trying commit 5cd8653 with merge d4c0af305803772d2c1c456b06f28d006ea4ddab... |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 26, 2024
…eck-IBT, r=<try> Migrate `branch-protection-check-IBT` to rmake.rs - The Makefile version *never* ran because of Makefile syntax confusion because `ifeq ($(filter x86,$(LLVM_COMPONENTS)),x86_64)` [compares `x86` to `x86_64`, which always evaluates to false](rust-lang#126720 (comment)). - The test would've always failed because precompiled std is not built with `-Z cf-protection=branch`, but linkers require all input object files to indicate IBT support in order to enable IBT for the executable, which is not the case for std. - Thus, the test input file is instead changed to a `no_std` program. - Ignore cross-compile for now, because that will require us to build `core` for the cross-compile target (something like `minicore` will not suffice because we need to reach and go past the linking stage). The GNU property note was added by rust-lang#110304 in order to address rust-lang#103001. Partially supersedes rust-lang#129156. The rmake.rs port was initially authored by `@Rejyr` in rust-lang#126720. This PR is co-authored with `@Oneirical` and `@Rejyr.` r? `@bjorn3` or reroll try-job: x86_64-msvc try-job: x86_64-apple-1 try-job: x86_64-apple-2
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
jieyouxu
force-pushed
the
enable-branch-protection-check-IBT
branch
from
5cd8653 to
0734389
Compare
|
Ok, what if I just try to produce a minimal executable... |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 26, 2024
…eck-IBT, r=<try> Migrate `branch-protection-check-IBT` to rmake.rs - The Makefile version *never* ran because of Makefile syntax confusion because `ifeq ($(filter x86,$(LLVM_COMPONENTS)),x86_64)` [compares `x86` to `x86_64`, which always evaluates to false](rust-lang#126720 (comment)). - The test would've always failed because precompiled std is not built with `-Z cf-protection=branch`, but linkers require all input object files to indicate IBT support in order to enable IBT for the executable, which is not the case for std. - Thus, the test input file is instead changed to a `no_std` program. - Only specifically `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` for now. The GNU property note was added by rust-lang#110304 in order to address rust-lang#103001. Partially supersedes rust-lang#129156. The rmake.rs port was initially authored by `@Rejyr` in rust-lang#126720. This PR is co-authored with `@Oneirical` and `@Rejyr.` r? `@bjorn3` or reroll try-job: x86_64-mingw-1 try-job: x86_64-mingw-2 try-job: x86_64-msvc try-job: x86_64-apple-1 try-job: x86_64-apple-2
|
⌛ Trying commit 0734389 with merge 3d945a5696688e18dd91d6f74a17c8b93ca9df25... |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
- The Makefile version *never* ran because of Makefile syntax confusion. - The test would've always failed because precompiled std is not built with `-Z cf-protection=branch`, but linkers require all input object files to indicate IBT support in order to enable IBT for the executable, which is not the case for std. - Thus, the test input file is instead changed to a `no_std` + `no_core` program. Co-authored-by: Jerry Wang <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Oneirical <[email protected]>
jieyouxu
force-pushed
the
enable-branch-protection-check-IBT
branch
from
0734389 to
4b4bc52
Compare
|
Ok I gave up fighting for cross-compile scenarios, I made the test @rustbot ready |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
ifeq ($(filter x86,$(LLVM_COMPONENTS)),x86_64)comparesx86tox86_64, which always evaluates to false.-Z cf-protection=branch, but linkers require all input object files to indicate IBT support in order to enable IBT for the executable, which is not the case for std.no_stdprogram.x86_64-unknown-linux-gnuhost, there are various other problems when the test is cross-compiled that I didn't want to fix atm, and is left as an exercise for the-Z cf-protectionimplementers.The GNU property note was added by #110304 in order to address #103001.
Partially supersedes #129156.
The rmake.rs port was initially authored by @Rejyr in #126720.
This PR is co-authored with @Oneirical and @Rejyr.
r? @bjorn3 or reroll
try-job: x86_64-mingw-1
try-job: x86_64-mingw-2
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: x86_64-apple-1
try-job: x86_64-apple-2