From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ot0-f199.google.com (mail-ot0-f199.google.com [74.125.82.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833D583292 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:16:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ot0-f199.google.com with SMTP id x57so11742991otd.8 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 07:16:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot0-x22c.google.com (mail-ot0-x22c.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::22c]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j23si607162otd.275.2017.06.22.07.16.05 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Jun 2017 07:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id r67so11877538ota.1 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 07:16:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170622082501.5q66ucborgxdxqzg@gmail.com> References: <20170619105008.GD10246@leverpostej> <20170622082501.5q66ucborgxdxqzg@gmail.com> From: Dmitry Vyukov Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:15:44 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] kasan: allow kasan_check_read/write() to accept pointers to volatiles Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Mark Rutland , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Will Deacon , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrey Ryabinin , kasan-dev , "x86@kernel.org" , LKML , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Linus Torvalds On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: >> > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:31AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> >> Currently kasan_check_read/write() accept 'const void*', make them >> >> accept 'const volatile void*'. This is required for instrumentation >> >> of atomic operations and there is just no reason to not allow that. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov >> >> Cc: Mark Rutland >> >> Cc: Andrey Ryabinin >> >> Cc: Thomas Gleixner >> >> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" >> >> Cc: Peter Zijlstra >> >> Cc: Andrew Morton >> >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> >> Cc: x86@kernel.org >> >> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org >> >> Cc: kasan-dev@googlegroups.com >> > >> > Looks sane to me, and I can confirm this doesn't advervsely affect >> > arm64. FWIW: >> > >> > Acked-by: Mark Rutland >> > >> > Mark. >> >> >> Great! Thanks for testing. >> >> Ingo, what are your thoughts? Are you taking this to locking tree? When? > > Yeah, it all looks pretty clean to me too. I've applied the first three patches to > the locking tree, but did some minor stylistic cleanups to the first patch to > harmonize the style of the code - which made the later patches not apply cleanly. > > Mind sending the remaining patches against the locking tree, tip:locking/core? > (Please also add in all the acks you got.) Mailed v5 rebased on tip:locking/core (now only 4 patches). Added Acked/Reviewed-By that I got. > This should also give people (Peter, Linus?) a last minute chance to object to my > suggestion of increasing the linecount in patch #1: > > 0f2376eb0ff8: locking/atomic/x86: Un-macro-ify atomic ops implementation > > arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- > arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_32.h | 81 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ > arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- > 3 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-) > > ... to me the end result looks much more readable despite the +70 lines of code, > but if anyone feels strongly about this please holler! > > Thanks, > > Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org