Greg Steuck <gnezdo@openbsd.org> writes:

> In case somebody wants to stare at the differences without waiting for
> clang to build, behold
>
> --- good-direct.s	Sat Jul 13 00:30:39 2024
> +++ bad-direct.s	Sat Jul 13 00:29:50 2024
> @@ -40,7 +40,8 @@
>  	stp	xzr, x19, [x0]
>  	.cfi_def_cfa wsp, 32
>  	ldp	x19, x15, [sp, #16]             // 16-byte Folded Reload
> -	ldp	x29, x30, [sp], #32             // 16-byte Folded Reload
> +	ldp	x29, x30, [sp]                  // 16-byte Folded Reload
> +	str	xzr, [sp, #32]!                 // 8-byte Folded Spill

I believe the code is mangled here, the below is my interpretation of
what these instructions do as simpler single-value sequential actions.
I was using https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20220728-00/?p=106912 
as a decoder ring:

-	ldp	x29, x30, [sp], #32             // 16-byte Folded Reload
  x29 <- [sp]
  x30 <- [sp+8]
  sp  <- sp + 32
+	ldp	x29, x30, [sp]                  // 16-byte Folded Reload
+	str	xzr, [sp, #32]!                 // 8-byte Folded Spil
  x29 <- [sp]
  x30 <- [sp+8]
  [sp + 32] <- 0
  sp <- sp + 32

Since the point of the patch is to modify the code such that x30 is
overwritten on the stack, the code we really want would be the following:

  x29 <- [sp]
  x30 <- [sp+8]
  [sp + 8] <- 0
  sp <- sp + 32

Thanks
Greg