linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] time/sched_clock: Broaden sched

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: <20241105093516.GB10375@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 10:35:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] time/sched_clock: Broaden sched_clock()'s
 instrumentation coverage

On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 10:22:51AM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> Oops, typo'd the commit message:
> 
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 at 17:19, Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Most of sched_clock()'s implementation is ineligible for instrumentation
> > due to relying on sched_clock_noinstr().
> >
> > Split the implementation off into an __always_inline function
> > __sched_clock(), which is then used by the noinstr and instrumentable
> > version, to allow more of sched_clock() to be covered by various
> > instrumentation.
> >
> > This will allow instrumentation with the various sanitizers (KASAN,
> > KCSAN, KMSAN, UBSAN). For KCSAN, we know that raw seqcount_latch usage
> > without annotations will result in false positive reports: tell it that
> > all of __sched_clock() is "atomic" for the latch writer; later changes
> 
> s/writer/reader/
> 
> > in this series will take care of the readers.
> 
> s/readers/writers/
> 
> ... might be less confusing. If you apply, kindly fix up the commit
> message, so that future people will be less confused. The code comment
> is correct.

So done. Thanks!