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:   Wed, 19 Feb 2020 17:03:18 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        mingo@...nel.org, joel@...lfernandes.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, gustavo@...eddedor.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, paulmck@...nel.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
        luto@...nel.org, tony.luck@...el.com, frederic@...nel.org,
        dan.carpenter@...cle.com, mhiramat@...nel.org,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 16/22] locking/atomics, kcsan: Add KCSAN
 instrumentation

On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 10:46:26AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:47:40 +0100
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
> > 
> > This adds KCSAN instrumentation to atomic-instrumented.h.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > [peterz: removed the actual kcsan hooks]
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > ---
> >  include/asm-generic/atomic-instrumented.h |  390 +++++++++++++++---------------
> >  scripts/atomic/gen-atomic-instrumented.sh |   14 -
> >  2 files changed, 212 insertions(+), 192 deletions(-)
> > 
> 
> 
> Does this and the rest of the series depend on the previous patches in
> the series? Or can this be a series on to itself (patches 16-22)?

It can probably stand on its own, but it very much is related in so far
that it's fallout from staring at all this nonsense.

Without these the do_int3() can actually have accidental tracing before
reaching it's nmi_enter().

Powered by blists - more mailing lists