[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190529103010.GP2623@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 12:30:10 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] asm-generic, x86: Add bitops instrumentation for
KASAN
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 12:16:31PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2019 at 12:01, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 11:20:17AM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > > For the default, we decided to err on the conservative side for now,
> > > since it seems that e.g. x86 operates only on the byte the bit is on.
> >
> > This is not correct, see for instance set_bit():
> >
> > static __always_inline void
> > set_bit(long nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> > {
> > if (IS_IMMEDIATE(nr)) {
> > asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "orb %1,%0"
> > : CONST_MASK_ADDR(nr, addr)
> > : "iq" ((u8)CONST_MASK(nr))
> > : "memory");
> > } else {
> > asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX __ASM_SIZE(bts) " %1,%0"
> > : : RLONG_ADDR(addr), "Ir" (nr) : "memory");
> > }
> > }
> >
> > That results in:
> >
> > LOCK BTSQ nr, (addr)
> >
> > when @nr is not an immediate.
>
> Thanks for the clarification. Given that arm64 already instruments
> bitops access to whole words, and x86 may also do so for some bitops,
> it seems fine to instrument word-sized accesses by default. Is that
> reasonable?
Eminently -- the API is defined such; for bonus points KASAN should also
do alignment checks on atomic ops. Future hardware will #AC on unaligned
[*] LOCK prefix instructions.
(*) not entirely accurate, it will only trap when crossing a line.
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1556134382-58814-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists