Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2022 20:42:37 +0900
From:   Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc:     Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kasan: call kasan_malloc() from __kmalloc_*track_caller()
Message-ID: <YyhVrepabvXPTKa6@hyeyoo>
References: <20220914020001.2846018-1-pcc@google.com>
 <YyF6N8uHGVrqpoDM@hyeyoo>
 <f06965ea-c7e5-3a8d-f819-64baedf75d96@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f06965ea-c7e5-3a8d-f819-64baedf75d96@suse.cz>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 07:32:50PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 9/14/22 08:52, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> 
> Thanks for the Cc.
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 07:00:01PM -0700, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
> >> We were failing to call kasan_malloc() from __kmalloc_*track_caller()
> >> which was causing us to sometimes fail to produce KASAN error reports
> >> for allocations made using e.g. devm_kcalloc(), as the KASAN poison was
> >> not being initialized. Fix it.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
> >> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 5.15
> >> ---
> >> The same problem is being fixed upstream in:
> 
> The "upstream" here is now only in -next, not mainline yet, so we still
> have more options at this point.
> 
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220817101826.236819-6-42.hyeyoo@gmail.com/
> >> as part of a larger patch series, but this more targeted fix seems
> >> more suitable for the stable kernel. Hyeonggon, maybe you can add
> >> this patch to the start of your series and it can be picked up
> >> by the stable maintainers.
> ...
> > 
> > Ah, I should have sent it to stable team ;)
> > 
> > I think "Option 3" in Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst will be appropriate,
> > So will resend this after the series goes to Linus's tree.
> 
> I'll pick this for sending to Linus after rc6, which means the series in
> slab.git / -next will afterwards cause a trivial conflict to resolve
> when merging. AFAIK Linus prefers that over late rebasing.
> It will also make it simple for stable.

I think that is better option, thanks!

> 
> > Thank you Peter!
> > 
> 

-- 
Thanks,
Hyeonggon