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: <20210525175819.699786-1-elver@google.com> <CANiq72krX9PU14wFsQyW_CJEjTS-TT8wyhBVZZbC132Gz5XO-Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANpmjNPGUAv-d3yEusyF11ip0zEdht7eMGi4pSoQsRYns-MvJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANiq72kCkej_ONwSWjRHWLVrr+g0BZygAUAQVx+FQf7DEdg3cQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANpmjNM_fP-ziy204=1rd52hOO4WfCsxAwQgJ-t1WF_yFo=UzA@mail.gmail.com> <CANpmjNOkX5NFFekezDSntjVBp2mVgxTprjV1QK56DsE2fv-w3A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNOkX5NFFekezDSntjVBp2mVgxTprjV1QK56DsE2fv-w3A@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 May 2021 20:12:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72n8OT7mw0comw+mJtr_+Zzz+kv8Pd_eR0H6Ccqrd3T+ew@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kcov: add __no_sanitize_coverage to fix noinstr for all architectures
To:     Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
        Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 2:38 PM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, let's wait for response to: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103159
> If that lands in the LLVM repo I'll change to use
> __has_feature(coverage_sanitizer), and send a v2. That __has_feature()
> is a bit of a lie though, because fsanitize-coverage has long been
> supported, but it just so happens that if we get it, then its
> availability implies availability of the no_sanitize("coverage")
> attribute.

Thanks a lot for that! Appreciated :)

Cheers,
Miguel