linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] kasan: allow kasan_check_read/write() to accept pointers to volatiles

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]

Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:25:01 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] kasan: allow kasan_check_read/write() to accept
 pointers to volatiles


* Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:31AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >> Currently kasan_check_read/write() accept 'const void*', make them
> >> accept 'const volatile void*'. This is required for instrumentation
> >> of atomic operations and there is just no reason to not allow that.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
> >> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> >> Cc: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>
> >> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> >> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
> >> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> >> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> >> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> >> Cc: x86@...nel.org
> >> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
> >> Cc: kasan-dev@...glegroups.com
> >
> > Looks sane to me, and I can confirm this doesn't advervsely affect
> > arm64. FWIW:
> >
> > Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> >
> > Mark.
> 
> 
> Great! Thanks for testing.
> 
> Ingo, what are your thoughts? Are you taking this to locking tree? When?

Yeah, it all looks pretty clean to me too. I've applied the first three patches to 
the locking tree, but did some minor stylistic cleanups to the first patch to 
harmonize the style of the code - which made the later patches not apply cleanly.

Mind sending the remaining patches against the locking tree, tip:locking/core? 
(Please also add in all the acks you got.)

This should also give people (Peter, Linus?) a last minute chance to object to my 
suggestion of increasing the linecount in patch #1:

 0f2376eb0ff8: locking/atomic/x86: Un-macro-ify atomic ops implementation

 arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h      | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
 arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_32.h | 81 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
 arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
 3 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-)

... to me the end result looks much more readable despite the +70 lines of code, 
but if anyone feels strongly about this please holler!

Thanks,

	Ingo