From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60E57C433E2 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 23:36:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 190C620756 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 23:36:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="n4d86YrH" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727189AbgIOXgk (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:36:40 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35104 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727577AbgIOXgG (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:36:06 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x32b.google.com (mail-ot1-x32b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECBDCC06178A for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 16:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32b.google.com with SMTP id e23so4968240otk.7 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 16:36:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LPIBIQbbpXb5b+E+3fSEaQzi61gRepS0Kzj7VhcTRxw=; b=n4d86YrHF/WQAuo/E0fzBxBRTgzGDadWKnl52eKGrx4eTm+BZnjXBwF26cGAchj+Iu U3HcSqeD4njaKBABeFq3T6PCWzrKXXoeNikboDU7QXBodvt2UON8O6i4i84wMpX8dGaF ACqGZtTMfgX35JNWMezHF4XYHOJaNQuHNFm/hH+F9BaCtmuYHg1JTIXoVJ9+6I4Xyx9e oUgBT5edshZ3uHwi0bNlDWURE1wf4xMCgM5eiJaW0vaVicCOu/KazJnigaIV9DYjeaFI MPA8jNhM5OGR+XzUKcsomKd3MqRa5gjdMdDqXM+MGs22O2f28H92+Yc1x0XalIBuMjDi vn2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LPIBIQbbpXb5b+E+3fSEaQzi61gRepS0Kzj7VhcTRxw=; b=W6G0VgI4NwBVaUHDyB4eASaYZfVZLPPygx8zI+/tcC7k264Adtu9iXoDFyHMQFEi6K HzO0w4evM3M7JHOtw2buASgSBcKI9B9iUEtCLnVeKSDtxaWNUzU5X8WGgKelo6dxj43t hMFTbj5ccxtiEqK4E37Dx2XtOpDMrMXScjvMnnhnjsY/KsnldL8PlHQq5kEftTE+B2QK B+DeEEUmU/Gqv2GpWk4vdqqfzuVHlqqnhBiCHNVkWy2bd3mrgFPJ/aH2qW8f6HXgUSWZ RZR6m9Uk9OLzY4fVuvkuADQx++xwbvvmvzHWForWOAO1KA431IMOU5urBZPsBpSpRn5V IDhQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533MEiRp5/F/CPFXY/ajF3GHVdBfn/heuq813K0lV5qDexWRjLk4 Gg2tXdrXVRI1SH4YpUZjv6R3CJPVmrtDuZ3VuyAfzA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzR/ellVCtnCr18ZyYuoA8Tr5FujGTsbRFahthBlgbjhJAABO5VgJyH06GV11rFf+W3DyjyQNfVVQqjJqvU/SQ= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:758b:: with SMTP id s11mr13757374otk.251.1600212964087; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 16:36:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5f60c4e0.Ru0MTgSE9A7mqhpG%lkp@intel.com> <20200915135519.GJ14436@zn.tnic> <20200915141816.GC28738@shao2-debian> <20200915160554.GN14436@zn.tnic> <20200915170248.gcv54pvyckteyhk3@treble> <20200915212804.vvm7ovffqynkvi5a@treble> In-Reply-To: <20200915212804.vvm7ovffqynkvi5a@treble> From: Marco Elver Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 01:35:52 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [tip:x86/seves] BUILD SUCCESS WITH WARNING e6eb15c9ba3165698488ae5c34920eea20eaa38e To: Josh Poimboeuf Cc: Nick Desaulniers , Borislav Petkov , Rong Chen , kernel test robot , "Li, Philip" , x86-ml , LKML , clang-built-linux , Arnd Bergmann , Kees Cook Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 23:28, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 02:13:01PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > Triple checking what I wrote above; it looks like the randconfig had > > BOTH CONFIG_KASAN=y and CONFIG_UBSAN=y enabled. Aren't the sanitizers > > supposed to be mutually exclusive? If so, we should ensure that via > > kconfig these can't be selected together via randconfig. > > No idea... They are not mutually exclusive. The big ones like KASAN/KCSAN/KMSAN are mutually exclusive (compiler complains if you mix the flags), but UBSAN can be enabled with other sanitizers (and fsanitize-coverage, although not strictly a "sanitizer" it's still instrumentation based). In general, we shouldn't artificially disallow mixing them if it's supported by the compiler and our runtime can handle it. I'll have a look at the rest tomorrow (UBSAN_TRAP stuff, which coincidentally also came up in some other patch). Thanks, -- Marco