From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f71.google.com (mail-oi0-f71.google.com [209.85.218.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19E816B025E for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 05:57:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi0-f71.google.com with SMTP id e123so20176473oig.7 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 02:57:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from foss.arm.com (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com. [217.140.101.70]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w3si4570033oib.298.2017.10.10.02.57.53 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 02:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 10:56:19 +0100 From: Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] kcov: support comparison operands collection Message-ID: <20171010095618.GF27659@leverpostej> References: <20171009150521.82775-1-glider@google.com> <20171009154610.GA22534@leverpostej> <20171009183734.GA7784@leverpostej> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dmitry Vyukov Cc: Alexander Potapenko , Andrew Morton , Alexander Popov , Andrey Ryabinin , Quentin Casasnovas , andreyknvl , Kees Cook , Vegard Nossum , syzkaller , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , LKML On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 08:46:18PM +0200, 'Dmitry Vyukov' via syzkaller wrote: > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 08:15:10PM +0200, 'Dmitry Vyukov' via syzkaller wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > >> > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 05:05:19PM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > > > >> > ... I note that a few places in the kernel use a 128-bit type. Are > >> > 128-bit comparisons not instrumented? > >> > >> Yes, they are not instrumented. > >> How many are there? Can you give some examples? > > > > From a quick scan, it doesn't looks like there are currently any > > comparisons. > > > > It's used as a data type in a few places under arm64: > > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/checksum.h: __uint128_t tmp; > > arch/arm64/include/asm/checksum.h: tmp = *(const __uint128_t *)iph; > > arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h: __uint128_t vregs[32]; > > arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h: __uint128_t vregs[32]; > > arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/sigcontext.h: __uint128_t vregs[32]; > > arch/arm64/kernel/signal32.c: __uint128_t raw; > > arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c: __uint128_t tmp; > > Then I think we just continue ignoring them for now :) > In the future we can extend kcov to trace 128-bits values. We will > need to add a special flag and write 2 consecutive entries for them. > Or something along these lines. Just wanted to make sure that we weren't backing ourselves into a corner w.r.t. ABI; that sounds fine to me. Thanks, Mark. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org