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:   Tue, 6 Jul 2021 10:44:46 +0200
From:   Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RCU vs data_race()

On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 10:00, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
[...]
> In that case, would not an explicit: data_debug(addr) call (implemented
> by KASAN/KCSAN/whoever), which would report whatever knowledge they have
> about that address, be even more useful?

KCSAN/KASAN report data-races/memory errors as soon as they encounter
them, but before they do, cannot give you any more than that (metadata
if it exists, but not sure it can be interpreted in any useful way
before an error occurs).

But maybe I misunderstood. Is data_debug() meant to not return
anything and instead just be a "fake access"?

For those, we already have various existing primitives:

-- KCSAN: ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_{ACCESS,WRITER}()
(https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kcsan.html#race-detection-beyond-data-races)

-- All sanitizers (KASAN & KCSAN right now): <linux/instrumented.h>:
instrument_*() calls, for generic explicit instrumentation.

-- For sanitizer-specific checks, there's everything else in
<linux/{kasan,kcsan}-checks.h>, but instrumented.h should be
preferred.

Thanks,
-- Marco

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ