linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH RESEND -next 00/21] Address sanitizer for kernel (kasan)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOMGZ=Fmqg6MWyx3NygqVmYiqw=npkPQrO9ifhF489bq5Gxz4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 9 Jul 2014 23:59:01 +0200
From:	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <a.ryabinin@...sung.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
	Konstantin Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
	Alexey Preobrazhensky <preobr@...gle.com>,
	Andrey Konovalov <adech.fo@...il.com>,
	Yuri Gribov <tetra2005@...il.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH RESEND -next 00/21] Address sanitizer for kernel
 (kasan) - dynamic memory error detector.

On 9 July 2014 23:44, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> writes:
>>
>> You're also claiming that "KASAN is better than all of
>
> better as in finding more bugs, but surely not better as in
> "do so with less overhead"
>
>> CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC".  So should we just disallow (or hide)
>> DEBUG_PAGEALLOC on kernels where KASAN is available?
>
> I don't think DEBUG_PAGEALLOC/SLUB debug and kasan really conflict.
>
> DEBUG_PAGEALLOC/SLUB is "much lower overhead but less bugs found".
> KASAN is "slow but thorough" There are niches for both.
>
> But I could see KASAN eventually deprecating kmemcheck, which
> is just incredible slow.

FWIW, I definitely agree with this -- if KASAN can do everything that
kmemcheck can, it is no doubt the right way forward.


Vegard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/