linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] kasan: mark !__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ stubs __always

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: <20251216130155.GD3707891@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 14:01:55 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>
Cc: 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>,
	Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] kasan: mark !__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ stubs
 __always_inline

On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 10:16:34AM +0000, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> The x86 instrumented bitops in
> include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-non-atomic.h are
> KASAN-instrumented via explicit calls to instrument_* functions from
> include/linux/instrumented.h.
> 
> This bitops are used from noinstr code in __sev_es_nmi_complete(). This
> code avoids noinstr violations by disabling __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ etc for
> the compilation unit.

Yeah, so don't do that? That's why we use raw_atomic_*() in things like
smp_text_poke_int3_handler().