Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190225124330.613028745@infradead.org> <20190225125232.191698923@infradead.org>
 <20190227140830.GP32494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAHk-=wg6P=hDhq+kPs0TCCvN7_q3usW5WNWzfdCBcLX_syoVxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190227173046.GU32494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20190227173046.GU32494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 27 Feb 2019 09:36:11 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj2tocacYp2vDJZy9NWatdk_YCjoFYkcSGAbKon8anTLA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] objtool: Add UACCESS validation
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, valentin.schneider@arm.com,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 9:30 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> Right, but I was hoping to avoid having to do that; and I think we can
> do that if we push all of kasan_report into an exception, like that
> 'patch' I just posted.
>
> If I'm not mistaken the regular kasan house-keeping crud just prods at
> the shadow memory with simple code and should be perfectly safe.

Fair enough. I do agree it would be nice to not have the save/restore
simply because "it cannot matter" and we have the static tool to prove
that.

             Linus