linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] kmemcheck: remove annotations

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20171011140659.pud73efdfk6ib34u@sasha-lappy>
Date:   Wed, 11 Oct 2017 14:07:02 +0000
From:   "Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
CC:     "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "vegardno@....uio.no" <vegardno@....uio.no>,
        "penberg@...nel.org" <penberg@...nel.org>,
        "ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        "glider@...gle.com" <glider@...gle.com>,
        "devtimhansen@...il.com" <devtimhansen@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] kmemcheck: remove annotations

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 03:17:32PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Sat 07-10-17 03:02:13, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> Remove kmemcheck annotations, and calls to kmemcheck from the kernel.
>
>How did you generate this? I suspect a git grep + sed? Because this
>doesn't seem to be correct. I didn't get further than this

I had an (apparently broken) Coccinelle script to remove references to
kmemcheck hooks.

>> @@ -266,7 +264,6 @@ static inline int dma_map_sg_attrs(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sg,
>>  	struct scatterlist *s;
>>
>>  	for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i)
>> -		kmemcheck_mark_initialized(sg_virt(s), s->length);
>>  	BUG_ON(!valid_dma_direction(dir));
>>  	ents = ops->map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
>>  	BUG_ON(ents < 0);
>
>which doesn't really look correct. I appreciate you have split this up
>and the resulting code might even be correct I find it quite important
>to have such a large changes be reproducible by reviewers because it is
>simply impossible to review this manually.

Let me send a fix for that, and review this again.

Thanks for the review!

>-- 
>Michal Hocko
>SUSE Labs

-- 

Thanks,
Sasha