From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>
Cc: ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com, glider@google.com, andreyknvl@gmail.com,
dvyukov@google.com, vincenzo.frascino@arm.com, corbet@lwn.net,
will@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
scott@os.amperecomputing.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com,
pankaj.gupta@amd.com, leitao@debian.org, kaleshsingh@google.com,
maz@kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev,
james.morse@arm.com, ardb@kernel.org,
hardevsinh.palaniya@siliconsignals.io, david@redhat.com,
yang@os.amperecomputing.com, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] kasan/hw-tags: introduce kasan.store_only option
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 18:44:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJ9yFZ0aobVUPDip@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aJ9OA/cHk1iFUPyH@e129823.arm.com>
On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 04:10:59PM +0100, Yeoreum Yun wrote:
> > > Like we do in mte_enable_kernel_asymm(), if the feature is not available
> > > just fall back to checking both reads and writes in the chosen
> > > async/sync/asymm way. You can add some pr_info() to inform the user of
> > > the chosen kasan mode. It's really mostly an performance choice.
> >
> > But MTE_STORE_ONLY is defined as a SYSTEM_FEATURE.
> > This means that when it is called from kasan_init_hw_tags_cpu(),
> > the store_only mode is never set in system_capability,
> > so it cannot be checked using cpus_have_cap().
> >
> > Although the MTE_STORE_ONLY capability is verified by
> > directly reading the ID register (seems ugly),
> > my concern is the potential for an inconsistent state across CPUs.
> >
> > For example, in the case of ASYMM, which is a BOOT_CPU_FEATURE,
> > all CPUs operate in the same mode —
> > if ASYMM is not supported, either
> > all CPUs run in synchronous mode, or all run in asymmetric mode.
> >
> > However, for MTE_STORE_ONLY, CPUs that support the feature will run in store-only mode,
> > while those that do not will run with full checking for all operations.
> >
> > If we want to enable MTE_STORE_ONLY in kasan_init_hw_tags_cpu(),
> > I believe it should be reclassified as a BOOT_CPU_FEATURE.x
> > Otherwise, the cpu_enable_mte_store_only() function should still be called
> > as the enable callback for the MTE_STORE_ONLY feature.
> > In that case, kasan_enable_store_only() should be invoked (remove late init),
> > and if it returns an error, stop_machine() should be called to disable
> > the STORE_ONLY feature on all other CPUs
> > if any CPU is found to lack support for MTE_STORE_ONLY.
> >
> > Am I missing something?
Good point.
> So, IMHO like the ASYMM feature, it would be good to change
> MTE_STORE_ONLY as BOOT_CPU_FEATURE.
> That would makes everything as easiler and clear.
Yeah, let's do this. If people mix different features, we'll revisit at
that time. The asymmetric tag checking is also a boot CPU feature.
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-15 20:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-13 17:53 [PATCH v2 0/2] introduce kasan.store_only option in hw-tags Yeoreum Yun
2025-08-13 17:53 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] kasan/hw-tags: introduce kasan.store_only option Yeoreum Yun
2025-08-14 5:03 ` Andrey Konovalov
2025-08-14 8:51 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-08-15 11:19 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-08-15 11:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-08-15 13:51 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-08-15 15:10 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-08-15 17:44 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2025-08-15 14:47 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-08-15 17:46 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-08-13 17:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] kasan: apply store-only mode in kasan kunit testcases Yeoreum Yun
2025-08-14 5:04 ` Andrey Konovalov
2025-08-14 11:13 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-08-15 6:14 ` Andrey Konovalov
2025-08-15 8:06 ` Yeoreum Yun
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=aJ9yFZ0aobVUPDip@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@gmail.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=hardevsinh.palaniya@siliconsignals.io \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=kaleshsingh@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=pankaj.gupta@amd.com \
--cc=ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com \
--cc=scott@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=yeoreum.yun@arm.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.