linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 23/23] objtool, kcsan: Remove memory barrier instrumentation from noinstr
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 17:13:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YVxrn2658Xdf0Asf@elver.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YVxjH2AtjvB8BDMD@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 04:37PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 12:59:05PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > Teach objtool to turn instrumentation required for memory barrier
> > modeling into nops in noinstr text.
> > 
> > The __tsan_func_entry/exit calls are still emitted by compilers even
> > with the __no_sanitize_thread attribute. The memory barrier
> > instrumentation will be inserted explicitly (without compiler help), and
> > thus needs to also explicitly be removed.
> 
> How is arm64 and others using kernel/entry + noinstr going to fix this?
> 
> ISTR they fully rely on the compilers not emitting instrumentation,
> since they don't have objtool to fix up stray issues like this.

So this is where I'd like to hear if the approach of:

 | #if !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_WANTS_NO_INSTR) || defined(CONFIG_STACK_VALIDATION)
 | ...
 | #else
 | #define kcsan_noinstr noinstr
 | static __always_inline bool within_noinstr(unsigned long ip)
 | {
 | 	return (unsigned long)__noinstr_text_start <= ip &&
 | 	       ip < (unsigned long)__noinstr_text_end;
 | }
 | #endif

and then (using the !STACK_VALIDATION definitions)

 | kcsan_noinstr void instrumentation_may_appear_in_noinstr(void)
 | {
 | 	if (within_noinstr(_RET_IP_))
 | 		return;

works for the non-x86 arches that select ARCH_WANTS_NO_INSTR.

If it doesn't I can easily just remove kcsan_noinstr/within_noinstr, and
add a "depends on !ARCH_WANTS_NO_INSTR || STACK_VALIDATION" to the
KCSAN_WEAK_MEMORY option.

Looking at a previous discussion [1], however, I was under the
impression that this would work.

[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CANpmjNMAZiW-Er=2QDgGP+_3hg1LOvPYcbfGSPMv=aR6MVTB-g@mail.gmail.com


  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-05 15:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-05 10:58 [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 00/23] kcsan: Support detecting a subset of missing memory barriers Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 01/23] kcsan: Refactor reading of instrumented memory Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 02/23] kcsan: Remove redundant zero-initialization of globals Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 03/23] kcsan: Avoid checking scoped accesses from nested contexts Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 04/23] kcsan: Add core support for a subset of weak memory modeling Marco Elver
2021-10-05 12:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 13:13     ` Marco Elver
2021-10-05 14:20       ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 05/23] kcsan: Add core memory barrier instrumentation functions Marco Elver
2021-10-05 11:41   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 11:45     ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 11:50       ` Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 06/23] kcsan, kbuild: Add option for barrier instrumentation only Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 07/23] kcsan: Call scoped accesses reordered in reports Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 08/23] kcsan: Show location access was reordered to Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 09/23] kcsan: Document modeling of weak memory Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 10/23] kcsan: test: Match reordered or normal accesses Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 11/23] kcsan: test: Add test cases for memory barrier instrumentation Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 12/23] kcsan: Ignore GCC 11+ warnings about TSan runtime support Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 13/23] kcsan: selftest: Add test case to check memory barrier instrumentation Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 14/23] locking/barriers, kcsan: Add instrumentation for barriers Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 15/23] locking/barriers, kcsan: Support generic instrumentation Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:58 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 16/23] locking/atomics, kcsan: Add instrumentation for barriers Marco Elver
2021-10-05 12:02   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 12:16     ` Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:59 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 18/23] x86/barriers, kcsan: Use generic instrumentation for non-smp barriers Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:59 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 19/23] x86/qspinlock, kcsan: Instrument barrier of pv_queued_spin_unlock() Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:59 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 20/23] mm, kcsan: Enable barrier instrumentation Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:59 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 21/23] sched, kcsan: Enable memory " Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:59 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 22/23] objtool, kcsan: Add memory barrier instrumentation to whitelist Marco Elver
2021-10-05 10:59 ` [PATCH -rcu/kcsan 23/23] objtool, kcsan: Remove memory barrier instrumentation from noinstr Marco Elver
2021-10-05 14:37   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 15:13     ` Marco Elver [this message]
2021-11-11 10:11       ` Marco Elver
2021-11-11 11:35         ` Peter Zijlstra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YVxrn2658Xdf0Asf@elver.google.com \
    --to=elver@google.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox