[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1r9LbZ3f_AcBG6LCmmL9KhzUSUMJuhtVKTkUwYjrexmg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 15:51:41 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-build-reports@...ts.linaro.org,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/26] compiler: introduce noinline_for_kasan annotation
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Would KMSAN also force local variables to be non-overlapping the way that
>> asan-stack=1 and -fsanitize-address-use-after-scope do? As I understood it,
>> KMSAN would add extra code for maintaining the uninit bits, but in an example
>> like this
> The thing is that KMSAN (and other tools that insert heavyweight
> instrumentation) may cause heavy register spilling which will also
> blow up the stack frames.
In that case, I would expect a mostly distinct set of functions to have large
stack frames with KMSAN, compared to the ones that need
noinline_for_kasan. In most cases I patched, the called inline function is
actually trivial, but invoked many times from the same caller.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists