Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231121220155.1217090-1-iii@linux.ibm.com> <20231121220155.1217090-29-iii@linux.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20231121220155.1217090-29-iii@linux.ibm.com>
From:   Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:49:18 +0100
Message-ID: <CAG_fn=WjEV4CP2RTX1xeuG=kd9Lj5X1Tf4QCRuNW-vzDUpzBGw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 28/33] s390/string: Add KMSAN support
To:     Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
        kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 11:03=E2=80=AFPM Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.co=
m> wrote:
>
> Add KMSAN support for the s390 implementations of the string functions.
> Do this similar to how it's already done for KASAN, except that the
> optimized memset{16,32,64}() functions need to be disabled: it's
> important for KMSAN to know that they initialized something.
>
> The way boot code is built with regard to string functions is
> problematic, since most files think it's configured with sanitizers,
> but boot/string.c doesn't. This creates various problems with the
> memset64() definitions, depending on whether the code is built with
> sanitizers or fortify. This should probably be streamlined, but in the
> meantime resolve the issues by introducing the IN_BOOT_STRING_C macro,
> similar to the existing IN_ARCH_STRING_C macro.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>