[BOLT] Gadget scanner: improve handling of unreachable basic blocks

Instead of refusing to analyze an instruction completely, when it is
unreachable according to the CFG reconstructed by BOLT, pessimistically
assume all registers to be unsafe at the start of basic blocks without
any predecessors. Nevertheless, unreachable basic blocks found in
optimized code likely means imprecise CFG reconstruction, thus report a
warning once per basic block without predecessors.

Author: atrosinenko

bolt/lib/Passes/PAuthGadgetScanner.cpp

@@ -342,6 +342,12 @@ class SrcSafetyAnalysis {
     return S;
   }
 
+  /// Creates a state with all registers marked unsafe (not to be confused
+  /// with empty state).
+  SrcState createUnsafeState() const {
+    return SrcState(NumRegs, RegsToTrackInstsFor.getNumTrackedRegisters());
+  }
+
   BitVector getClobberedRegs(const MCInst &Point) const {
     BitVector Clobbered(NumRegs);
     // Assume a call can clobber all registers, including callee-saved
@@ -585,6 +591,13 @@ class DataflowSrcSafetyAnalysis
     if (BB.isEntryPoint())
       return createEntryState();
 
+    // If a basic block without any predecessors is found in an optimized code,
+    // this likely means that some CFG edges were not detected. Pessimistically
+    // assume all registers to be unsafe before this basic block and warn about
+    // this fact in FunctionAnalysis::findUnsafeUses().
+    if (BB.pred_empty())
+      return createUnsafeState();
+
     return SrcState();
   }
 
@@ -689,12 +702,6 @@ class CFGUnawareSrcSafetyAnalysis : public SrcSafetyAnalysis,
   using SrcSafetyAnalysis::BC;
   BinaryFunction &BF;
 
-  /// Creates a state with all registers marked unsafe (not to be confused
-  /// with empty state).
-  SrcState createUnsafeState() const {
-    return SrcState(NumRegs, RegsToTrackInstsFor.getNumTrackedRegisters());
-  }
-
 public:
   CFGUnawareSrcSafetyAnalysis(BinaryFunction &BF,
                               MCPlusBuilder::AllocatorIdTy AllocId,
@@ -1364,19 +1371,30 @@ void FunctionAnalysisContext::findUnsafeUses(
     BF.dump();
   });
 
+  if (BF.hasCFG()) {
+    // Warn on basic blocks being unreachable according to BOLT, as this
+    // likely means CFG is imprecise.
+    for (BinaryBasicBlock &BB : BF) {
+      if (!BB.pred_empty() || BB.isEntryPoint())
+        continue;
+      // Arbitrarily attach the report to the first instruction of BB.
+      MCInst *InstToReport = BB.getFirstNonPseudoInstr();
+      if (!InstToReport)
+        continue; // BB has no real instructions
+
+      Reports.push_back(
+          make_generic_report(MCInstReference::get(InstToReport, BF),
+                              "Warning: no predecessor basic blocks detected "
+                              "(possibly incomplete CFG)"));
+    }
+  }
+
   iterateOverInstrs(BF, [&](MCInstReference Inst) {
     if (BC.MIB->isCFI(Inst))
       return;
 
     const SrcState &S = Analysis->getStateBefore(Inst);
-
-    // If non-empty state was never propagated from the entry basic block
-    // to Inst, assume it to be unreachable and report a warning.
-    if (S.empty()) {
-      Reports.push_back(
-          make_generic_report(Inst, "Warning: unreachable instruction found"));
-      return;
-    }
+    assert(!S.empty() && "Instruction has no associated state");
 
     if (auto Report = shouldReportReturnGadget(BC, Inst, S))
       Reports.push_back(*Report);

bolt/test/binary-analysis/AArch64/gs-pacret-autiasp.s

@@ -215,12 +215,17 @@ f_callclobbered_calleesaved:
         .globl  f_unreachable_instruction
         .type   f_unreachable_instruction,@function
 f_unreachable_instruction:
-// CHECK-LABEL: GS-PAUTH: Warning: unreachable instruction found in function f_unreachable_instruction, basic block {{[0-9a-zA-Z.]+}}, at address
+// CHECK-LABEL: GS-PAUTH: Warning: no predecessor basic blocks detected (possibly incomplete CFG) in function f_unreachable_instruction, basic block {{[0-9a-zA-Z.]+}}, at address
 // CHECK-NEXT:    The instruction is     {{[0-9a-f]+}}:       add     x0, x1, x2
 // CHECK-NOT:   instructions that write to the affected registers after any authentication are:
+// CHECK-LABEL: GS-PAUTH: non-protected ret found in function f_unreachable_instruction, basic block {{[0-9a-zA-Z.]+}}, at address
+// CHECK-NEXT:    The instruction is     {{[0-9a-f]+}}:       ret
+// CHECK-NEXT:  The 0 instructions that write to the affected registers after any authentication are:
         b       1f
         add     x0, x1, x2
 1:
+        // "ret" is reported as unprotected, as LR is pessimistically assumed
+        // unsafe at "add x0, x1, x2", thus it is unsafe at "ret" as well.
         ret
         .size f_unreachable_instruction, .-f_unreachable_instruction
 

bolt/test/binary-analysis/AArch64/gs-pauth-calls.s

@@ -1428,6 +1428,63 @@ printed_instrs_nocfg:
         br      x0
         .size   printed_instrs_nocfg, .-printed_instrs_nocfg
 
+// Test handling of unreachable basic blocks.
+//
+// Basic blocks without any predecessors were observed in real-world optimized
+// code. At least sometimes they were actually reachable via jump table, which
+// was not detected, but the function was processed as if its CFG was
+// reconstructed successfully.
+//
+// As a more predictable model example, let's use really unreachable code
+// for testing.
+
+        .globl  bad_unreachable_call
+        .type   bad_unreachable_call,@function
+bad_unreachable_call:
+// CHECK-LABEL: GS-PAUTH: Warning: no predecessor basic blocks detected (possibly incomplete CFG) in function bad_unreachable_call, basic block {{[^,]+}}, at address
+// CHECK-NEXT:  The instruction is     {{[0-9a-f]+}}:      blr     x0
+// CHECK-NOT:   instructions that write to the affected registers after any authentication are:
+// CHECK-LABEL: GS-PAUTH: non-protected call found in function bad_unreachable_call, basic block {{[^,]+}}, at address
+// CHECK-NEXT:  The instruction is     {{[0-9a-f]+}}:      blr     x0
+// CHECK-NEXT:  The 0 instructions that write to the affected registers after any authentication are:
+        paciasp
+        stp     x29, x30, [sp, #-16]!
+        mov     x29, sp
+
+        b       1f
+        // unreachable basic block:
+        blr     x0
+
+1:      // reachable basic block:
+        ldp     x29, x30, [sp], #16
+        autiasp
+        ret
+        .size bad_unreachable_call, .-bad_unreachable_call
+
+        .globl  good_unreachable_call
+        .type   good_unreachable_call,@function
+good_unreachable_call:
+// CHECK-NOT: non-protected call{{.*}}good_unreachable_call
+// CHECK-LABEL: GS-PAUTH: Warning: no predecessor basic blocks detected (possibly incomplete CFG) in function good_unreachable_call, basic block {{[^,]+}}, at address
+// CHECK-NEXT:  The instruction is     {{[0-9a-f]+}}:      autia   x0, x1
+// CHECK-NOT: instructions that write to the affected registers after any authentication are:
+// CHECK-NOT: non-protected call{{.*}}good_unreachable_call
+        paciasp
+        stp     x29, x30, [sp, #-16]!
+        mov     x29, sp
+
+        b       1f
+        // unreachable basic block:
+        autia   x0, x1
+        blr     x0      // <-- this call is definitely protected provided at least
+                        //     basic block boundaries are detected correctly
+
+1:      // reachable basic block:
+        ldp     x29, x30, [sp], #16
+        autiasp
+        ret
+        .size good_unreachable_call, .-good_unreachable_call
+
         .globl  main
         .type   main,@function
 main: