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: <20210825092116.149975-1-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210825092116.149975-1-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
From:   Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:14:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CANpmjNMnU5P9xsDhgeBKQR7Tg-3cHPkMNx7906yYwEAj85sNWg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] ARM: Support KFENCE feature
To:     Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Cc:     Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 25 Aug 2021 at 11:17, Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> wrote:
> The patch 1~3 is to support KFENCE feature on ARM.
>
> NOTE:
> The context of patch2/3 changes in arch/arm/mm/fault.c is based on link[1],
> which make some refactor and cleanup about page fault.
>
> kfence_test is not useful when kfence is not enabled, skip kfence test
> when kfence not enabled in patch4.
>
> I tested the kfence_test on ARM QEMU with or without ARM_LPAE and all passed.

Thank you for enabling KFENCE on ARM -- I'll leave arch-code review to
an ARM maintainer.

However, as said on the patch, please drop the change to the
kfence_test and associated changes. This is working as intended; while
you claim that it takes a long time to run when disabled, when running
manually you just should not run it when disabled. There are CI
systems that rely on the KUnit test output and the fact that the
various test cases say "not ok" etc. Changing that would mean such CI
systems would no longer fail if KFENCE was accidentally disabled (once
KFENCE is enabled on various CI, which we'd like to do at some point).
There are ways to fail the test faster, but they all complicate the
test for no good reason. (And the addition of a new exported function
that is essentially useless.)

Thanks,
-- Marco