wwwdocs: Document ShadowCallStack support

  Document ShadowCallStack support.  The option link doesn't work yet
of course, but I checked that it works with gcc-12.1.0/ removed.

OK to install?

Thanks,
Richard


---
 htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html | 11 +++++++++++
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
  

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:11:06AM +0000, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Document ShadowCallStack support.  The option link doesn't work yet
> of course, but I checked that it works with gcc-12.1.0/ removed.
> 
> OK to install?
> 
> Thanks,
> Richard
> 
> 
> ---
>  htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html | 11 +++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
> index b6341fda..216ee0b6 100644
> --- a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
> +++ b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
> @@ -96,6 +96,17 @@ a work-in-progress.</p>
>        Note that default vectorizer cost model has been changed which used to behave
>        as <code>-fvect-cost-model=cheap</code> were specified.
>    </li>
> +  <li>
> +    GCC now supports the
> +    <a href="https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ShadowCallStack.html">
> +    ShadowCallStack</a> sanitizer, which can be enabled using the
> +    command-line option
> +    <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-12.1.0/gcc/Instrumentation-Options.html#index-fsanitize_003dshadow-call-stack">
> +    <code>-fshadow-call-stack</code></a>.  This sanitizer currently

The option is -fsanitize=shadow-call-stack , no?

> +    only works on AArch64 targets and it requires an environment in
> +    which all code has been compiled with <code>-ffixed-r18</code>.
> +    Its primary initial user is the Linux kernel.
> +  </li>
>  </ul>
>  

	Jakub
  

Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:11:06AM +0000, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> Document ShadowCallStack support.  The option link doesn't work yet
>> of course, but I checked that it works with gcc-12.1.0/ removed.
>> 
>> OK to install?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Richard
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>>  htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html | 11 +++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
>> index b6341fda..216ee0b6 100644
>> --- a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
>> +++ b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
>> @@ -96,6 +96,17 @@ a work-in-progress.</p>
>>        Note that default vectorizer cost model has been changed which used to behave
>>        as <code>-fvect-cost-model=cheap</code> were specified.
>>    </li>
>> +  <li>
>> +    GCC now supports the
>> +    <a href="https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ShadowCallStack.html">
>> +    ShadowCallStack</a> sanitizer, which can be enabled using the
>> +    command-line option
>> +    <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-12.1.0/gcc/Instrumentation-Options.html#index-fsanitize_003dshadow-call-stack">
>> +    <code>-fshadow-call-stack</code></a>.  This sanitizer currently
>
> The option is -fsanitize=shadow-call-stack , no?

Gah, thanks.  Clearly one of those days :-(

Richard


diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
index b6341fda..9c2d9ea8 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
@@ -96,6 +96,17 @@ a work-in-progress.</p>
       Note that default vectorizer cost model has been changed which used to behave
       as <code>-fvect-cost-model=cheap</code> were specified.
   </li>
+  <li>
+    GCC now supports the
+    <a href="https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ShadowCallStack.html">
+    ShadowCallStack</a> sanitizer, which can be enabled using the
+    command-line option
+    <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-12.1.0/gcc/Instrumentation-Options.html#index-fsanitize_003dshadow-call-stack">
+    <code>-fsanitize=shadow-call-stack</code></a>.  This sanitizer currently
+    only works on AArch64 targets and it requires an environment in
+    which all code has been compiled with <code>-ffixed-r18</code>.
+    Its primary initial user is the Linux kernel.
+  </li>
 </ul>
 
 <!-- .................................................................. -->
  

On Tue, 22 Feb 2022, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Gah, thanks.  Clearly one of those days :-(

Looks good to me, thanks.

Gerald