Using GCC's Nested Functions with Wide Pointers and No Trampolines II

(uecker.codeberg.page)

33 points | by uecker 4 hours ago

3 comments

  • mbeavitt 35 minutes ago
    Why would someone want to use a nested function, practically speaking?
    • mananaysiempre 9 minutes ago
      Good C style is that every function that accepts a callback should also accept an opaque context pointer it then passes through unchanged to the callback. Usually the caller will allocate a structure on the stack or the heap, stash some of its local variables there, then use them in the callback. A nested function does the structure back-and-forth for you in the stack-allocated case. In GCC’s original formulation it also passes the context pointer implicitly

        size_t filter(bool (*predicate)(int), int *p, size_t n) {
            for (size_t r = 0, w = 0; r < n; r++) {
                if (predicate(p[r])) p[w++] = p[r];
            }
            return w;
        }
        size_t lowpass(int limit, int *p, size_t n) {
            bool lower(int value) {
                return value < limit; // use the parent's local variable
            }
            return filter(lower, p, n);
        }
      
      but that requires an executable stack and TFA is about avoiding that.
    • bobmcnamara 2 minutes ago
      Just a little cleaner than placing it in the global or file namespaces.
    • anta40 20 minutes ago
      Say to strictly enforce modularity, e.g helper functions that can only be accessed within its function.

      Pascal supports it (at least Turbo Pascal, no idea about ISO Pascal).

    • jcranmer 10 minutes ago
      When you want to use lambdas, but your language doesn't have lambdas, so you reach for the nearest thing instead.
    • kloop 30 minutes ago
      So that you can name a section of code without polluting the namespace.
  • tpoacher 43 minutes ago
    What's a "trampoline"?
    • jcranmer 5 minutes ago
      In this context:

      Nested functions have a different ABI from regular C functions, due to the invisible static chain register that needs to be set up. C has no way of indicating this different ABI, so GCC happily lets you cast a nested function to a C function pointer by creating a little tiny function that puts the right value in the static chain register before calling the nested function. This little tiny function is the trampoline.

      Since the trampoline needs to live somewhere, GCC puts it on the stack, requiring the stack to be executable and consequently a whole lot of people hate the feature because it's a walking security nightmare.

    • mananaysiempre 27 minutes ago
      Could be a number of things depending on context. In this case it’s a short function that adjusts some things and jumps to the actual functions (a “thunk” is another term for this). Specifically, if in GCC you write

        int f(int x) {
            int g(int y) { ... use x and y ... }
            ...
            h(&g);
            ...
        }
      
      then what the compiled code for f does is construct on the stack a short piece of machine code:

        mov <well-known register>, <frame pointer>
        jmp <start of g’s code>
      
      and &g points to the start not of g’s code but of this snippet on the stack, which has the parent function’s frame pointer compiled into it as a literal constant. The snippet is called a trampoline.
    • dgellow 25 minutes ago
    • monster_truck 35 minutes ago
      It's where you jump and then get immediately bounced back. Basically GOTOs with params
  • mananaysiempre 1 hour ago
    What about your older patch where -fno-trampolines meant a function pointer could either be a code pointer or a closure (descriptor) pointer, distinguished by a tag?
    • uecker 44 minutes ago
      My old patch from 2018? This was not accepted to GCC because it relied on function pointers being aligned and there were concerns with this.

      But I prefer this approach anyhow, as it does not impose any run-time cost for checking the tag, and is easier to optimize.