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: <20200304162541.46663-1-elver@google.com> <20200304162541.46663-2-elver@google.com>
 <1583340277.7365.153.camel@lca.pw> <CANpmjNPKjbCi=m+3Cqyhh9o5xrmLOzB6O48vtAP9KMsEsgzNrA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNPKjbCi=m+3Cqyhh9o5xrmLOzB6O48vtAP9KMsEsgzNrA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Mar 2020 15:24:39 +0100
Message-ID: <CANpmjNMXFyhA23WrTTAjzGcjvtXz-1y5DQi6a0xgSxzg_7bGEg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] kcsan: Update Documentation/dev-tools/kcsan.rst
To:     Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 17:57, Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 17:44, Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2020-03-04 at 17:25 +0100, 'Marco Elver' via kasan-dev wrote:
> > >  Selective analysis
> > >  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > @@ -111,8 +107,8 @@ the below options are available:
> > >
> > >  * Disabling data race detection for entire functions can be accomplished by
> > >    using the function attribute ``__no_kcsan`` (or ``__no_kcsan_or_inline`` for
> > > -  ``__always_inline`` functions). To dynamically control for which functions
> > > -  data races are reported, see the `debugfs`_ blacklist/whitelist feature.
> > > +  ``__always_inline`` functions). To dynamically limit for which functions to
> > > +  generate reports, see the `DebugFS interface`_ blacklist/whitelist feature.
> >
> > As mentioned in [1], do it worth mentioning "using __no_kcsan_or_inline for
> > inline functions as well when CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y" ?
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/E9162CDC-BBC5-4D69-87FB-C93AB8B3D581@lca.pw/
>
> Strictly speaking it shouldn't be necessary. Only __always_inline is
> incompatible with __no_kcsan.
>
> AFAIK what you noticed is a bug with some versions of GCC. I think
> with GCC >=9 and Clang there is no problem.
>
> The bigger problem is turning a bunch of 'inline' functions into
> '__always_inline' accidentally, that's why the text only mentions
> '__no_kcsan_or_inline' for '__always_inline'. For extremely small
> functions, that's probably ok, but it's not general advice we should
> give for that reason.
>
> I will try to write something about this here, but sadly there is no
> clear rule for this until the misbehaving compilers are no longer
> supported.

I've sent v2 of the comment/documentation update series:
   http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200305142109.50945-1-elver@google.com
  (only this patch changed)

Please check it captures the current caveat around "__no_kcsan inline"
with old compilers.

Thank you,
-- Marco