linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v5 00/18] Rework READ

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: <26283b5bccc8402cb8c243c569676dbd@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 May 2020 13:55:43 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Peter Zijlstra' <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
CC:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 00/18] Rework READ_ONCE() to improve codegen

From: Peter Zijlstra
> Sent: 14 May 2020 15:25
..
> Exact same requirements, KASAN even has the data_race() problem through
> READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(), UBSAN doesn't and might be simpler because of it.

What happens if you implement READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() with an
asm() statement containing a memory load?

Is that enough to kill all the instrumentation?

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)