Re: [PATCH] kasan: use IS_ALIGNED in memory_is_poisoned_8()

[Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com>]

2015-09-12 1:47 GMT+03:00 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>:
> On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:02:29 +0800 Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com> wrote:
>> -             if (likely(((addr + 7) & KASAN_SHADOW_MASK) >= 7))
>> +             if (likely(IS_ALIGNED(addr, 8)))
>>                       return false;
>
> Wouldn't IS_ALIGNED(addr, KASAN_SHADOW_SCALE_SIZE) be more appropriate?
>
> But I'm not really sure what the original code is trying to do.
>

Original code is trying to estimate whether we should check 2 shadow
bytes or just 1 should be enough.

>         if ((addr + 7) & 7) >= 7)
>
> can only evaluate true if ((addr + 7) & 7) equals 7, so the ">=" could
> be "==".
>

Yes, it could be "==".
">=" is just for consistency with similar code in memory_is_poisoned_2/4.

If I'm not mistaken generic formula for such check looks like this:
        ((addr + size - 1) & KASAN_SHADOW_MASK) >= ((size - 1) &
KASAN_SHADOW_MASK)

But when size >= KASAN_SHADOW_SCALE_SIZE we could just check for alignment.

> I think.  The code looks a bit weird.  A code comment would help.
>
> And how come memory_is_poisoned_16() does IS_ALIGNED(addr, 8)?  Should
> it be 16?
>

No, If 16 bytes are 8-byte aligned, then shadow is 2-bytes.

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>