|
|
|
|
|
|
by MaulingMonkey
1169 days ago
|
|
|
> It feels like tail calls are too high level of a concept to be in an "assembly" language. In x86, the difference is between `call some_fn` and `jmp some_fn` (perhaps after a `call _guard_check_icall` to implement Control Flow Guard) In WASM, the difference is between `call[_indirect] some_fn` and `return_call[_indirect] some_fn`, which is just `jmp some_fn` with a funny name - and similar control flow integrity constraints as imposed by CFG. Why not just use `jmp some_fn`? Because WASM lacks a generic `jmp some_fn`, as they've baked https://webassembly.org/docs/security/#control-flow-integrit... into the arch, which seems fair enough. |
|
|