[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANpmjNNxX-YpRkEHYjpZGVDw=9nRpyHbGRz6jCV14=bxtsXENg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 14:37:42 +0100
From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] kasan: Emit different calls for instrumentable memintrinsics
On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 13:36, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 12:01:40PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > The current gcc behavior is that operations like aggregate copies, or
> > clearing which might or might not need memcpy/memset/memmove under the hood
> > later are asan instrumented before the operation (in order not to limit the
> > choices on how it will be expanded), uses of builtins (__builtin_ prefixed
> > or not) are also instrumented before the calls unless they are one of the
> > calls that is recognized as always instrumented. None for hwasan,
> > for asan:
> > index, memchr, memcmp, memcpy, memmove, memset, strcasecmp, strcat, strchr,
> > strcmp, strcpy, strdup, strlen, strncasecmp, strncat, strncmp, strcspn,
> > strpbrk, strspn, strstr, strncpy
> > and for those builtins gcc disables inline expansion and enforces a library
> > call (but until the expansion they are treated in optimizations like normal
> > builtins and so could be say DCEd, or their aliasing behavior is considered
> > etc.). kasan behaves the same I think.
> >
> > Now, I think libasan only has __asan_ prefixed
> > __asan_memmove, __asan_memset and __asan_memcpy, nothing else, so most of
> > the calls from the above list even can't be prefixed.
Correct, right now libasan only does memmove, memset, and memcpy. I
don't think it'll ever do more, at least not in the near future.
> > So, do you want for --param asan-kernel-mem-intrinsic-prefix=1 to __asan_
> > prefix just memcpy/memmove/memset and nothing else?
Yes.
> > Is it ok to emit
> > memcpy/memset/memmove from aggregate operations which are instrumented
> > already at the caller (and similarly is it ok to handle those operations
> > inline)?
Yes, I think that's fair.
> I'm thinking it is trivial to add more __asan prefixed functions as
> needed, while trying to untangle the trainwreck created by assuming the
> normal functions are instrumented is much more work.
For the kernel param, I'd only do memcpy/memmove/memset, as those are
the most brittle ones. The string functions are instrumented on most
architectures through lib/string.c being instrumented.
Thanks,
-- Marco
Powered by blists - more mailing lists