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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210126134603.49759-1-vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
 <20210126134603.49759-4-vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> <CAAeHK+xAbsX9Zz4aKXToNTrbgrrYck23ohGJHXvgeSTyZy=Odg@mail.gmail.com>
 <e5582f87-2987-a258-350f-1fac61822657@arm.com> <CAAeHK+x5O595yU9q03G8xPvwpU_3Y6bQhW=+09GziOuTPZNVHw@mail.gmail.com>
 <f1ad988d-6385-45e0-d683-048bfca0b9c0@arm.com> <8021dbc4-8745-2430-8d52-6236ae8c47c7@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <8021dbc4-8745-2430-8d52-6236ae8c47c7@arm.com>
From:   Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 29 Jan 2021 19:44:08 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAeHK+wcVMeqct2ime45eXckUpj7uvfuPe801tmRsFdxVLY-Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/4] kasan: Add report for async mode
To:     Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
Cc:     Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@arm.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:42 PM Vincenzo Frascino
<vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrey,
>
> On 1/29/21 6:16 PM, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
> > What I meant is instead of:
> >
> > if (addr) trace_error_report_end(...);
> >
> > you might want to do:
> >
> > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS)) trace_error_report_end(...);
> >
> > because, could make sense to trace 0 in other cases?
> >
> > I could not find the implementation of trace_error_report_end() hence I am not
> > really sure on what it does.
>
> I figured it out how trace_error_report_end() works.

It's intended for collecting crashes for CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS.

> And in doing that I
> realized that the problem is sync vs async, hence I agree with what you are
> proposing:
>
> if (addr) trace_error_report_end(...);
>
> I will post v10 shortly. If we want to trace the async mode we can improve it in
> -rc1.

Sounds good, thanks!