I am a newcomer to assembly trying to understand the objdump of the following function:
int nothing(int num) {
return num;
}
This is the result (linux, x86-64, gcc 8):
push rbp
mov rbp,rsp
mov DWORD PTR [rbp-0x4],edi
mov eax,DWORD PTR [rbp-0x4]
pop rbp
ret
My questions are:
1. Where does edi come from? Reading through some intro docs, I was under the impression that [rbp-0x4] would contain num.
2. From the above, apparently edi contains the argument. But then what role does [rbp-0x4] play? Why not just mov eax, edi?
Thanks!
Where does edi come from?
... From the above, apparently edi contains the argument.
This is the calling convention (for Linux and many other OSs):
All programming languages for these OSs pass the first parameter in rdi. The result (value returned) is passed in rax.
And because your C compiler interprets int as 32 bits, only the low 32 bits of rdi and rax are used - which is edi and eax.
Programming languages for Windows pass the first parameter in rcx...
But then what role does [rbp-0x4] play?
Using rbp has mainly historic reasons here. In 16-bit code (as it was used in 1980s and 1990s PCs) it was not possible to address data on the stack using the sp register (which corresponds to rsp). The only register that allowed addressing values on the stack easily was the bp register (corresponding to rbp).
And even in 32- or 64-bit code it is more difficult to write a compiler that addresses local variables (on the stack) using rsp rather than using rbp.
The compiler generates the first 3 instructions of assembler code before it knows what is done in the C function. The compiler puts the value on the stack because you could do something like address = &num in the code. This is however not possible when num is in a register but only when num is located in the memory.
Why not just mov eax, edi?
If you tell the compiler to optimize the code, it will first check the content of the C function before generating the first assembler instruction. It will find out that it is not required to put the value into the memory.
In this case the code will indeed look like this:
mov eax, edi
ret
Related
I came across the following Go code:
type Element [12]uint64
//go:noescape
func CSwap(x, y *Element, choice uint8)
//go:noescape
func Add(z, x, y *Element)
where the CSwap and Add functions are basically coming from an assembly, and look like the following:
TEXT ·CSwap(SB), NOSPLIT, $0-17
MOVQ x+0(FP), REG_P1
MOVQ y+8(FP), REG_P2
MOVB choice+16(FP), AL // AL = 0 or 1
MOVBLZX AL, AX // AX = 0 or 1
NEGQ AX // RAX = 0x00..00 or 0xff..ff
MOVQ (0*8)(REG_P1), BX
MOVQ (0*8)(REG_P2), CX
// Rest removed for brevity
TEXT ·Add(SB), NOSPLIT, $0-24
MOVQ z+0(FP), REG_P3
MOVQ x+8(FP), REG_P1
MOVQ y+16(FP), REG_P2
MOVQ (REG_P1), R8
MOVQ (8)(REG_P1), R9
MOVQ (16)(REG_P1), R10
MOVQ (24)(REG_P1), R11
// Rest removed for brevity
What I try to do is that translate the assembly to a syntax that is more familiar to me (I think mine is more like NASM), while the above syntax is Go assembler. Regarding the Add method I didn't have much problem, and translated it correctly (according to test results). It looks like this in my case:
.text
.global add_asm
add_asm:
push r12
push r13
push r14
push r15
mov r8, [reg_p1]
mov r9, [reg_p1+8]
mov r10, [reg_p1+16]
mov r11, [reg_p1+24]
// Rest removed for brevity
But, I have a problem when translating the CSwap function, I have something like this:
.text
.global cswap_asm
cswap_asm:
push r12
push r13
push r14
mov al, 16
mov rax, al
neg rax
mov rbx, [reg_p1+(0*8)]
mov rcx, [reg_p2+(0*8)]
But this doesn't seem to be quite correct, as I get error when compiling it. Any ideas how to translate the above CSwap assembly part to something like NASM?
EDIT (SOLUTION):
Okay, after the two answers below, and some testing and digging, I found out that the code uses the following three registers for parameter passing:
#define reg_p1 rdi
#define reg_p2 rsi
#define reg_p3 rdx
Accordingly, rdx has the value of the choice parameter. So, all that I had to do was use this:
movzx rax, dl // Get the lower 8 bits of rdx (reg_p3)
neg rax
Using byte [rdx] or byte [reg_3] was giving an error, but using dl seems to work fine for me.
Basic docs about Go's asm: https://golang.org/doc/asm. It's not totally equivalent to NASM or AT&T syntax: FP is a pseudo-register name for whichever register it decides to use as the frame pointer. (Typically RSP or RBP). Go asm also seems to omit function prologue (and probably epilogue) instructions. As #RossRidge comments, it's a bit more like a internal representation like LLVM IR than truly asm.
Go also has its own object-file format, so I'm not sure you can make Go-compatible object files with NASM.
If you want to call this function from something other than Go, you'll also need to port the code to a different calling convention. Go appears to be using a stack-args calling convention even for x86-64, unlike the normal x86-64 System V ABI or the x86-64 Windows calling convention. (Or maybe those mov function args into REG_P1 and so on instructions disappear when Go builds this source for a register-arg calling convention?)
(This is why you could you had to use movzx eax, dl instead of loading from the stack at all.)
BTW, rewriting this code in C instead of NASM would probably make even more sense if you want to use it with C. Small functions are best inlined and optimized away by the compiler.
It would be a good idea to check your translation, or get a starting point, by assembling with the Go assembler and using a disassembler.
objdump -drwC -Mintel or Agner Fog's objconv disassembler would be good, but they don't understand Go's object-file format. If Go has a tool to extract the actual machine code or get it in an ELF object file, do that.
If not, you could use ndisasm -b 64 (which treats input files as flat binaries, disassembling all the bytes as if they were instructions). You can specify an offset/length if you can find out where the function starts. x86 instructions are variable length, and disassembly will likely be "out of sync" at the start of the function. You might want to add a bunch of single-byte NOP instructions (kind of a NOP sled) for the disassembler, so if it decodes some 0x90 bytes as part of an immediate or disp32 for a long instruction that was really not part of the function, it will be in sync. (But the function prologue will still be messed up).
You might add some "signpost" instructions to your Go asm functions to make it easy to find the right place in the mess of crazy asm from disassembling metadata as instructions. e.g. put a pmuludq xmm0, xmm0 in there somewhere, or some other instruction with a unique mnemonic that you can search for which the Go code doesn't include. Or an instruction with an immediate that will stand out, like addq $0x1234567, SP. (An instruction that will crash so you don't forget to take it out again is good here.)
Or you could use gdb's built-in disassembler: add an instruction that will segfault (like a load from a bogus absolute address (movl 0, AX null-pointer deref), or a register holding a non-pointer value e.g. movl (AX), AX). Then you'll have an instruction-pointer value for the instructions in memory, and can disassemble from some point behind that. (Probably the function start will be 16-byte aligned.)
Specific instructions.
MOVBLZX AL, AX reads AL, so that's definitely an 8-bit operand. The size for AX is given by the L part of the mnemonic, meaning long for 32 bit, like in GAS AT&T syntax. (The gas mnemonic for that form of movzx is movzbl %al, %eax). See What does cltq do in assembly? for a table of cdq / cdqe and the AT&T equivalent, and the AT&T / Intel mnemonic for the equivalent MOVSX instruction.
The NASM instruction you want is movzx eax, al. Using rax as the destination would be a waste of a REX prefix. Using ax as the destination would be a mistake: it wouldn't zero-extend into the full register, and would leave whatever high garbage. Go asm syntax for x86 is very confusing when you're not used to it, because AX can mean AX, EAX, or RAX depending on the operand size.
Obviously mov rax, al isn't a possibility: Like most instructions, mov requires both its operands to be the same size. movzx is one of the rare exceptions.
MOVB choice+16(FP), AL is a byte load into AL, not an immediate move. choice+16 is a an offset from FP. This syntax is basically the same as AT&T addressing modes, with FP as a register and choice as an assemble-time constant.
FP is a pseudo-register name. It's pretty clear that it should simply be loading the low byte of the 3rd arg-passing slot, because choice is the name of a function arg. (In Go asm, choice is just syntactic sugar, or a constant defined as zero.)
Before a call instruction, rsp points at the first stack arg, so that + 16 is the 3rd arg. It appears that FP is that base address (and might actually be rsp+8 or something). After a call (which pushes an 8 byte return address), the 3rd stack arg is at rsp + 24. After more pushes, the offset will be even larger, so adjust as necessary to reach the right location.
If you're porting this function to be called with a standard calling convention, the 3 integer args will be passed in registers, with no stack args. Which 3 registers depends on whether you're building for Windows vs. non-Windows. (See Agner Fog's calling conventions doc: http://agner.org/optimize/)
BTW, a byte load into AL and then movzx eax, al is just dumb. Much more efficient on all modern CPUs to do it in one step with
movzx eax, byte [rsp + 24] ; or rbp+32 if you made a stack frame.
I hope the source in the question is from un-optimized Go compiler output? Or the assembler itself makes such optimizations?
I think you can translate these as just
mov rbx, [reg_p1]
mov rcx, [reg_p2]
Unless I'm missing some subtlety, the offsets which are zero can just be ignored. The *8 isn't a size hint since that's already in the instruction.
The rest of your code looks wrong though. The MOVB choice+16(FP), AL in the original is supposed to be fetching the choice argument into AL, but you're setting AL to a constant 16, and the code for loading the other arguments seems to be completely missing, as is the code for all of the arguments in the other function.
I've spend lot of time trying to solve this problem and I don't understand, why it doesn't work. Problem's description is in comments below:
.386
.MODEL FLAT, STDCALL
OPTION CASEMAP:NONE
.NOLIST
.NOCREF
INCLUDE \masm32\include\windows.inc
.LIST
.CODE
DllEntry PROC hInstDLL:HINSTANCE, reason:DWORD, reserved1:DWORD
mov eax, TRUE
ret
DllEntry ENDP
caesarAsm proc string: DWORD, key: DWORD, stringLength : DWORD
mov esi, 1 ; I cannot use this register, mov esi, (anything) causes Crash:
; Run-Time Check Failure #0 - The value of ESP was not properly saved across a function call. This is usually a result of calling a function declared with one calling convention with a function pointer declared with a different calling convention
mov eax, string
ret
caesarAsm endp
END DllEntry
I searched "whole" Internet, I found that the problem is connected with stack, but no operation on stacks helped me to solve it.
I'm using Microsoft Visual Studio 2012
I assume the error does not occur in this function, rather, it is triggered elsewhere. The esi register is a callee-saved register. You must make sure its value is the same at function exit as it was at entry. You can use it in your function, but you must save and restore its value. Such as:
push esi
mov esi, 1
mov eax, string
pop esi
ret
This is all well documented. You may only use eax, ecx and edx without saving.
Side note: you are using high-level features of your assembler, you might want to check the actual generated code or refrain from using them until you are confident in what the result is going to be. Incidentally masm has a USES keyword which would do the save/restore for you.
I dont quiet understand the gcc prologue, especially for main.
Why is there the instruction and esp, 0xfffffff0 ? I know what it does but why is it necessary ?
When we call a function, we first have to push the arguments, but why gcc doesn't use the push instruction and uses movs instead ? Moreover using those movs, it creates an empty padding. It looks like a waste of memory, why so ?
Finally, gcc first uses the sub instruction to esp in order to "reserve" memory for the stack, but what makes sure that this memory is not used by on other program for instance ?
I think I understood quiet well the theory, but I couldnt find a document that explains more about memory in pratice (how do memory of several programs dont overlap, ...). Thank you for your answers.
PS : I add the assembly code and the cpp code :
Dump of assembler code for function main(int, char**):
0x08048657 <+0>: push ebp
0x08048658 <+1>: mov ebp,esp
0x0804865a <+3>: and esp,0xfffffff0
0x0804865d <+6>: sub esp,0x20
0x08048660 <+9>: mov DWORD PTR [esp+0x1c],0x3
0x08048668 <+17>: mov BYTE PTR [esp+0x1b],0x61
=> 0x0804866d <+22>: mov DWORD PTR [esp],0x8048771
0x08048674 <+29>: call 0x804863c <p(char*)>
0x08048679 <+34>: mov eax,0x0
0x0804867e <+39>: leave
0x0804867f <+40>: ret
End of assembler dump.
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
int b = 3;
char c = 'a';
p("hello woooooooooorld !!");}
The stack alignment is only done for main, the rest of the functions just keep the alignment required by the ABI.
The compiler uses mov instructions for locals so they can be accessed randomly. For outgoing function arguments you can ask for push instructions using the -mpush-args compiler option which might produce smaller code.
As for the wasted memory, you probably didn't compile with optimizations enabled (which would of course eliminate your b and c altogether since they are not used ;))
Each process has its own virtual memory address space, so there is no chance of anybody else using the memory allocated from the stack.
I'm trying to experiment with malloc and free in assembly code (NASM, 64 bit).
I have tried to malloc two arrays, each with space for 2 64 bit numbers. Now I would like to be able to write to their values (not sure if/how accessing them will work exactly) and then at the end of the whole program or in the case of an error at any point, free the memory.
What I have now works fine if there is one array but as soon as I add another, it fails on the first attempt to deallocate any memory :(
My code is currently the following:
extern printf, malloc, free
LINUX equ 80H ; interupt number for entering Linux kernel
EXIT equ 60 ; Linux system call 1 i.e. exit ()
segment .text
global main
main:
push dword 16 ; allocate 2 64 bit numbers
call malloc
add rsp, 4 ; Undo the push
test rax, rax ; Check for malloc failure
jz malloc_fail
mov r11, rax ; Save base pointer for array
; DO SOME CODE/ACCESSES/OPERATIONS HERE
push dword 16 ; allocate 2 64 bit numbers
call malloc
add rsp, 4 ; Undo the push
test rax, rax ; Check for malloc failure
jz malloc_fail
mov r12, rax ; Save base pointer for array
; DO SOME CODE/ACCESSES/OPERATIONS HERE
malloc_fail:
jmp dealloc
; Finish Up, deallocate memory and exit
dealloc:
dealloc_1:
test r11, r11 ; Check that the memory was originally allocated
jz dealloc_2 ; If not, try the next block of memory
push r11 ; push the address of the base of the array
call free ; Free this memory
add rsp, 4
dealloc_2:
test r12, r12
jz dealloc_end
push r12
call free
add rsp, 4
dealloc_end:
call os_return ; Exit
os_return:
mov rax, EXIT
mov rdi, 0
syscall
I'm assuming the above code is calling the C functions malloc() and free()...
If 1st malloc() fails, you arrive at dealloc_1 with whatever garbage is in r11 and r12 after returning from the malloc().
If 2nd malloc() fails, you arrive at dealloc_1 with whatever garbage is in r12 after returning from the malloc().
Therefore, you have to zero out r11 and r12 before doing the first allocation.
Since this is 64-bit mode, all pointers/addresses and sizes are normally 64-bit. When you pass one of those to a function, it has to be 64-bit. So, push dword 16 isn't quite right. It should be push qword 16 instead. Likewise, when you are removing these parameters from the stack, you have to remove exactly as many bytes as you've put there, so add rsp, 4 must change to add rsp, 8.
Finally, I don't know which registers malloc() and free() preserve and which they don't. You may need to save and restore the so-called volatile registers (see your C compiler documentation). The same holds for the code not shown. It must preserve r11 and r12 so they can be used for deallocation. EDIT: And I'd check if it's the right way of passing parameters through the stack (again, see your compiler documentation).
EDIT: you're testing r11 for 0 right before 2nd free(). It should be r12. But free() doesn't really mind receiving NULL pointers. So, these checks can be removed.
Pay attention to your code.
You have to obey x86-64 calling conventions: arguments might be passed through registers, in the case of malloc that would be RDI for the size. And as already pointed out, you have to watch out which registers are preserved by the called functions. (afaik only RBP, RSP and R12-R15 are preserved across function calls)
There are at least two bugs, because you test r11 again (the line test r11,r11 after dealloc_2:, but you supposedly wanted to test r12 here. Additionally you want to push a qword, if you are in 64 bit mode.
The reason the deallocation doesn't work at all may be because you are changing the contents of r11 or r12.
Not that both tests are not needed, as it is perfectly safe to call free with an null pointer.
I'm trying to call the following function:
long long RtlLargeIntegerDivide(long long dividend, long long divisor, long long* pRemainder)
in assembly code (NASM). It uses the stdcall calling convention, and it returns the quotient. These are the specifications:
Input: [EDX,EAX] (dividend), [ECX,EBX] (divisor)
Output: [EDX,EAX] (quotient), [ECX,EBX] (remainder)
How do I go about doing this? (My main problem is not exactly understanding EBP and ESP, and how they relate to local variables.)
(And no, this isn't homework; I'm trying to implement a wrapper C run-time library.)
Thank you!
In 32 bit mode you don't have to use EBP to access local variables at all, that is just a convention remnant from 16 bit times and doesn't concern us now anyway.
ESP is your stack pointer, I assume you know that. You can "allocate" space for your local variables by decrementing ESP.
stdcall calling convention uses the stack for argument passing. They are in normal order when on the stack, but if you are using PUSH that means you push them reversed. Integral return values are in EAX (and EDX when necessary). The called function cleans up the arguments from the stack.
So the following code should do what you want:
sub ESP, 8; make room for remainder
push ESP ; pass pointer to remainder as argument
push ECX
push EBX ; pass divisor argument
push EDX
push EAX ; pass dividend argument
call RtlLargeIntegerDivide
; quotient returned in EDX:EAX
; so just load remainder from stack
pop EBX
pop ECX
(For speed, you can use MOV instead of PUSH/POP)