[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72mvSkHULFVSDr6A=pv+2PUzXxzNFpjmKJGt4tJum_LEBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 21:33:05 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kcov: add __no_sanitize_coverage to fix noinstr for
all architectures
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 6:27 PM 'Marco Elver' via Clang Built Linux
<clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com> wrote:
>
> Note: In the Clang case, __has_feature(coverage_sanitizer) is only true
> if the feature is enabled, and therefore we do not require an additional
> defined(CONFIG_KCOV) (like in the GCC case where __has_attribute(..) is
I would put this explanation as a comment.
Other than that:
Reviewed-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>
Thanks!
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists