linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] compiler, atomics: Provide READ_ONCE

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: <5620E66F.6050406@virtuozzo.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:58:39 +0300
From:	Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	Wolfram Gloger <wmglo@...t.med.uni-muenchen.de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] compiler, atomics: Provide READ_ONCE_NOKSAN()

On 10/16/2015 01:33 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:44:53PM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>> 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_NOKSAN() macro. KASAN will not check the memory
>> accessed by READ_ONCE_NOKSAN(). The KernelThreadSanitizer (KTSAN)
>> is going to ignore it as well.
> 
> Frankly, the "NOKSAN" suffix is too specific. I know, I know, I'm
> bikeshedding but what happens if yet another tool wants to be disabled
> from checking there and that tool is not *SAN? We rename again?
> 
> So the "NOCHECK" suffix made much more sense, even if it was generic.
> IMNSVHO.
> 

Sounds reasonable.
Ingo, what do you think?

> Thanks.
> 
--
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/