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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 73BA9C433DB for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 18:13:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FF7764E0A for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 18:13:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232614AbhA2SN0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jan 2021 13:13:26 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:52498 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230249AbhA2SNX (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jan 2021 13:13:23 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B969913A1; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 10:12:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.37.12.11] (unknown [10.37.12.11]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F5033F885; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 10:12:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/4] kasan: Add report for async mode To: Andrey Konovalov , Alexander Potapenko Cc: Linux ARM , LKML , kasan-dev , Andrew Morton , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Dmitry Vyukov , Andrey Ryabinin , Marco Elver , Evgenii Stepanov , Branislav Rankov References: <20210126134603.49759-1-vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> <20210126134603.49759-4-vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> From: Vincenzo Frascino Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 18:16:31 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 1/29/21 6:09 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 6:56 PM Vincenzo Frascino > wrote: >> >> Hi Andrey, >> >> On 1/29/21 5:40 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote: >>> I suggest to call end_report(&flags, 0) here and check addr !=0 in >>> end_report() before calling trace_error_report_end(). >>> >> >> Probably this is better as: >> >> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS)) >> >> Because that condition passes always addr == 0. > > Not sure I understand. Call report_end(&flags, 0) and then there do: > > if (addr) trace_error_report_end(...); > > Although maybe it makes sense to still trace all async bugs to address > 0. Or to some magic address. > > Alex, WDYT? > What I meant is instead of: if (addr) trace_error_report_end(...); you might want to do: if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS)) trace_error_report_end(...); because, could make sense to trace 0 in other cases? I could not find the implementation of trace_error_report_end() hence I am not really sure on what it does. -- Regards, Vincenzo