[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <561E807C.50109@virtuozzo.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 19:19:08 +0300
From: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: tip-bot for Andrey Ryabinin <tipbot@...or.com>,
<linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Wolfram Gloger <wmglo@...t.med.uni-muenchen.de>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:locking/urgent] compiler, atomics: Provide READ_ONCE_NOCHECK
()
On 10/14/2015 06:50 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:28:43AM -0700, tip-bot for Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>> Commit-ID: 4115ffdf4d6f8986a7abe1dd522c163f599bc0e6
>>> Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/4115ffdf4d6f8986a7abe1dd522c163f599bc0e6
>>> Author: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>
>>> AuthorDate: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:28:07 +0300
>>> Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
>>> CommitDate: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 16:44:06 +0200
>>>
>>> compiler, atomics: Provide READ_ONCE_NOCHECK()
>>>
>>> Some code may perform racy by design memory reads. This could be
>>> harmless, yet such code may produce KASAN warnings.
>>>
>>> To hide such accesses from KASAN this patch introduces
>>> READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() macro. KASAN will not check the memory
>>> accessed by READ_ONCE_NOCHECK().
>>>
>>> This patch creates __read_once_size_nocheck() a clone of
>>> __read_once_size_check() (renamed __read_once_size()).
>>> The only difference between them is 'no_sanitized_address'
>>> attribute appended to '*_nocheck' function. This attribute tells
>>> the compiler that instrumentation of memory accesses should not
>>> be applied to that function. We declare it as static
>>> '__maybe_unsed' because GCC is not capable to inline such
>>> function: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67368
>>>
>>> With KASAN=n READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() is just a clone of READ_ONCE().
>>
>> So I add READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() for accesses for which the compiler cannot
>> prove safe address for KASAN's benefit, but READ_ONCE() suffices for
>> the data-race-detection logic in KTSAN, correct?
>
> KTSAN also needs READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() here.
Does it? What's the difference between READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() and READ_ONCE() with KTSAN=y?
AFAIK READ_ONCE() is sufficient to hide race from KTSAN. It doesn't *require* READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(), right?
> KTSAN will flag races
> between get_wchan() and the thread accesses to own stack even more
> aggressively than KASAN, because KTSAN won't like get_wchan() accesses
> even to non-poisoned areas of other thread stack.
>
--
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