Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
        'Will Deacon' <will@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 00/18] Rework READ_ONCE() to improve codegen
In-Reply-To: <9ba9552bd68a4461bb346dc3bae71d7a@AcuMS.aculab.com>
References: <20200511204150.27858-1-will@kernel.org> <20200512081826.GE2978@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CANpmjNNo3rhwqG=xEbpP9JiSd8-Faw8fkoUhYJjesHK5S5_KQQ@mail.gmail.com> <20200512190755.GL2957@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CANpmjNNeSnrAgfkskE5Y0NNu3-DS6hk+SwjkBunrr8FRxwwT-Q@mail.gmail.com> <20200513111057.GN2957@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CANpmjNMariz3-keqwUsLHVrpk2r7ThLSKtkhHxTDa3SEGeznhA@mail.gmail.com> <20200513123243.GO2957@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200513124021.GB20278@willie-the-truck> <9ba9552bd68a4461bb346dc3bae71d7a@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 May 2020 18:32:32 +0200
Message-ID: <87wo5f23tr.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> writes:
> From: Will Deacon
>> Sent: 13 May 2020 13:40
>> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 02:32:43PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 01:48:41PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
>> >
>> > > Disabling most instrumentation for arch/x86 is reasonable. Also fine
>> > > with the __READ_ONCE/__WRITE_ONCE changes (your improved
>> > > compiler-friendlier version).
>> > >
>> > > We likely can't have both: still instrument __READ_ONCE/__WRITE_ONCE
>> > > (as Will suggested) *and* avoid double-instrumentation in arch_atomic.
>> > > If most use-cases of __READ_ONCE/__WRITE_ONCE are likely to use
>> > > data_race() or KCSAN_SANITIZE := n anyway, I'd say it's reasonable for
>> > > now.
>> 
>> I agree that Peter's patch is the right thing to do for now. I was hoping we
>> could instrument __{READ,WRITE}_ONCE(), but that we before I realised that
>> __no_sanitize_or_inline doesn't seem to do anything.
>
> Could something be done that put the addresses of the instructions
> into a separate segment and have KASAN check that table before
> reporting an actual error?

That still does not solve the problem that the compiler adds calls into
k*san which we need to prevent in the first place.

Thanks,

        tglx