From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755037AbbJGQ1Y (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 7 Oct 2015 12:27:24 -0400
Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:30238 "EHLO mga01.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754847AbbJGQ1W (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 7 Oct 2015 12:27:22 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,649,1437462000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="575954601"
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 09:27:03 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
        Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
        Wolfram Gloger <wmglo@dent.med.uni-muenchen.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/process: Silence KASAN warnings in get_wchan()
Message-ID: <20151007162703.GL26924@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
References: <1444040906-6788-1-git-send-email-aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
 <20151005112341.GA1101@gmail.com>
 <CACT4Y+aOZjMB3b3AsPvREbr-5sV3N1Obh7rS+oOCUtCQeyT7VA@mail.gmail.com>
 <56126316.3030901@virtuozzo.com>
 <20151005163906.GE26924@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
 <5612AC7A.9080502@virtuozzo.com>
 <20151006072655.GB10672@gmail.com>
 <CALCETrUxUOhuqQr5wsrea1L2sTi9-vRXco2AswkReaLwpa3cMg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5614DDD2.3080408@virtuozzo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5614DDD2.3080408@virtuozzo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 11:54:42AM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
> On 10/06/2015 09:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > 
> > But what's wrong with the GCC attribute mechanism?  Surely GCC ought
> > to be able to generate the code, at least in the simple cases, and the
> > attribute already exists.  The attribute and READ_ONCE_NOCHECK seem
> > like the least messy in the C code.
> 
> The problem with 'no_sanitize_address' attribute is incompatibility with inlining. 
> GCC can't inline function with that attribute into function without it.
> And the contrary is also true - GCC can't inline function without attribute into function with such attribute.
> 
> Failure to inline always_inline function leads to build failure.

So just don't do that?  Don't set the attribute on functions marked inline.
Where do you see this anyways?


-Andi