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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 59F0FC433E7 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 05:21:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8399B2224D for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 05:21:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="Bszna/vO"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="nFj+RhH5" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8399B2224D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=1ppNIfxo4eZvCfqbbqFBejKPPwPCk7hcuQ928U0iYD8=; b=Bszna/vOdP00FtcUXPobpe4s3 OUiGD3frL2P5hOQjuF5WV9EFMCWgQ7v8OSaPiscyoVlH9C7ww8MlHvq+2HV0iBLItYrgF8Q7VwDU/ cnFcELmnkYWddNSUzcjpJdxVHuSayy6D2dgXvw4KoZgIkZBqS/Pz87xMsLUCcMS8+iqPDvlO5T8k5 WqjW918GExapkb3+lg3VLYNbMg2yCMJHGbH1yROzpXYbcgpukIoTAf9ts4E+ToeN/RKQEk4h4S5kP TLjhui5bxTZsSKaNozC/hSXkLbO9kVTl8BkGlFACggViJ64UCDtGkX690sz/QE5x8zv8wp/BaBHw8 5X3IDa01A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kUk4N-0007Cm-6w; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 05:20:23 +0000 Received: from mail-qk1-x742.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::742]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kUk4L-0007Bp-6V for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 05:20:21 +0000 Received: by mail-qk1-x742.google.com with SMTP id 188so547821qkk.12 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 22:20:18 -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=z9wYYqXSCH9hJsvZCRRfPmiplKII60fDiq3y/0UOTRQ=; b=nFj+RhH527dSF15OyCknqBlNqu/5E4YnS1qpIFJZvkK0948u69zvGZW4bKEqndnMFz 8yyx70GM4gugorWaNi9Kci+S9s4l/cZTT/4+wlXS78kRrYtRgPdN4mgLPQ6Xh7ovioJR gUO2EnXkClA3Rx+rf65BWHug7V0rfi7T4GnGTpLU0Ez5EEZ0aXY6b1Ga9I8unR45iRM4 righHXZWlAPHkljP5Y23955u2C47+j6rgw7tV/zyL1TqZpFVY8JhWYzmwEGFLnHsz/i1 ido0lhbQv3Uryk5j7uKTd5JqVqzYSe8vbOBMaxvzBaZ7BX2Bq64/CxUZqemmfqlASOAn ioog== 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=z9wYYqXSCH9hJsvZCRRfPmiplKII60fDiq3y/0UOTRQ=; b=X/2evXQycNOhs3qpmuBu4AJM0iEwoflSQSdjyCSQZ2tT9gETsDCqDTCNhwRvcrHcMw t6MTuT6iDqVVqWG4G3OK3o2rdd5cWJvoIAKnlStnlFri2g1XvtMMUB2+ZNI8i2CVT17Z fbXSjbBW9BML5rbG/czLguTRaLfDXRKcXzXR07S+uUUSoNO1+qcEX2scD3Fojlhtl28T u4qtiIzIh3XZ7TpsN3HSsVcR/INY6631oiMyNoVWJ3V6rs1+udaJ+6doTWXIHxJu/NMz cmB7+Em+Lq+H0VVX4Pk4TNhzYXQOdzzDNqmJp4mO246o0AXXsXGEymH0E89mWXntrWPU q4Vg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530epwQcjXJsomptv/Ku/qvh9wQRjTAc0+85YEek0HCPlW6USwid lEe+8N7n7MIghJmJwnVRoFZoTUIGyVN5YFFY1tWMKQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyx8CWXpC5StOxXKhwfKyIBUtcww66CulSXXuA5OMvHecs0nRH1A9mqu15lKale74SmTIIJ6I71TjzxvW0MI9I= X-Received: by 2002:a37:9301:: with SMTP id v1mr1244436qkd.350.1603171216987; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 22:20:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dmitry Vyukov Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 07:20:05 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/8] kasan: hardware tag-based mode for production use on arm64 To: Marco Elver X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201020_012021_263546_326437B3 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 17.60 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Branislav Rankov , Elena Petrova , Kostya Serebryany , Andrey Konovalov , Kevin Brodsky , Will Deacon , LKML , kasan-dev , Linux Memory Management List , Alexander Potapenko , Linux ARM , Serban Constantinescu , Catalin Marinas , Andrey Ryabinin , Andrew Morton , Vincenzo Frascino , Evgenii Stepanov Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 2:23 PM Marco Elver wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 22:44, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > [...] > > A question to KASAN maintainers: what would be the best way to support the > > "off" mode? I see two potential approaches: add a check into each kasan > > callback (easier to implement, but we still call kasan callbacks, even > > though they immediately return), or add inline header wrappers that do the > > same. > > This is tricky, because we don't know how bad the performance will be > if we keep them as calls. We'd have to understand the performance > impact of keeping them as calls, and if the performance impact is > acceptable or not. > > Without understanding the performance impact, the only viable option I > see is to add __always_inline kasan_foo() wrappers, which use the > static branch to guard calls to __kasan_foo(). This sounds reasonable to me. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel