[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPAsAGxuJJYwS2fQ5r63U=xY_MSSb=5vc_tUBvTjkq=JoXhd8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 14:36:25 +0400
From: Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>
To: "y.gribov" <y.gribov@...sung.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] UBSan: run-time undefined behavior sanity checker
2014-10-24 12:31 GMT+04:00 y.gribov <y.gribov@...sung.com>:
>> Unaligned accesses disabled because they are allowed on some arches (see
> HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS).
>> Another reason is that there are to many reports. Not because there are
>> lot of bugs, but because
>> there are many reports for one bug.
>
> A side note - unaligned accesses would prevent KASan from doing it's job
> well because instrumentation code relies on address alignment when
> performing the check.
>
I guess it only matters for inline instrumentation, right?
Because in outline case I've taken care about unaligned accesses.
We could do following trick in Kconfig:
select HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS if !KASAN
This will prevent a lot of unaligned accesses, but surely not all of them
--
Best regards,
Andrey Ryabinin
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists