From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: Enable KCSAN
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 13:25:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YadpsjyfdozccsOT@elver.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YadiUPpJ0gADbiHQ@FVFF77S0Q05N>
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 11:53AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
[...]
> * In the past clang did not have an attribute to suppress tsan instrumenation
> and would instrument noinstr regions. I'm not sure when clang gained the
> relevant attribute to supress this, but we will need to depend on this
> existing, either based on the clang version or with a test for the attribute.
>
> (If we're lucky, clang 12.0.0 is sufficient, and we solve BTI and this in one
> go).
>
> I *think* GCC always had an attribute, but I'm not certain.
>
> Marco, is there an existing dependency somewhere for this to work on x86? I
> thought there was an objtool pass to NOP this out, but I couldn't find it in
> mainline. If x86 is implicitly depending on a sufficiently recent version of
> clang, we add something to the common KCSAN Kconfig for ARCH_WANTS_NO_INSTR?
Apologies for the confusion w.r.t. attributes and which sanitizers on
which compilers respect which attributes. I think you may be confusing
things with KCOV (see 540540d06e9d9). I think the various 'select
ARCH_HAS_KCOV' may need adjusting, that is true.
But KCOV != KCSAN, and for KCSAN the story is different. Since the first
version of KCSAN in 5.8, we've had a working __no_kcsan (aka
__no_sanitize_thread) with all versions of Clang and GCC that support
KCSAN (see HAVE_KCSAN_COMPILER).
The recent discussion was for CONFIG_KCSAN_WEAK_MEMORY [1], because
Clang's no_sanitize("thread") would still instrument builtin atomics and
__tsan_func_{entry,exit}, which only that mode would start inserting
instrumentation for. That's not in mainline yet.
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20211130114433.2580590-1-elver@google.com
It is true that v1 and v2 of that series would have caused issues on
arm64, but after our discussion last week and tried a little harder and
v3 does the right thing for all architectures now and __no_kcsan will
disable all instrumentation (even for barriers).
So the attribute and noinstr story should not need anything else, and
the new KCSAN_WEAK_MEMORY has all right Kconfig dependencies in place
when it lands in mainline.
> * There are some latent issues with some code (e.g. alternatives, patching, insn)
> code being instrumentable even though this is unsound, and depending on
> compiler choices this can happen to be fine or can result in boot-time
> failures (I saw lockups when I started trying to add KCSAN for arm64).
>
> While this isn't just a KCSAN problem, fixing that requires some fairly
> significant rework to a bunch of code, and until that's done we're on very
> shaky ground. So I'd like to make KCSAN depend on EXPERT for now.
I take it you mean arm64 should do 'select HAVE_ARCH_KCSAN if EXPERT'. I
certainly don't mind, but usually folks interested in running debug
tools won't be stopped by a dependency on EXPERT. You could do 'select
HAVE_ARCH_KCSAN if BROKEN' which is more likely to prevent usage while
things are still likely to be broken on arm64.
Thanks,
-- Marco
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-01 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-29 14:57 [PATCH v2] arm64: Enable KCSAN Kefeng Wang
2021-12-01 10:17 ` Marco Elver
2021-12-01 11:53 ` Mark Rutland
2021-12-01 12:25 ` Marco Elver [this message]
2021-12-01 15:05 ` Mark Rutland
2021-12-02 1:35 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-12-02 10:15 ` Marco Elver
2021-12-02 10:19 ` Marco Elver
2021-12-02 10:45 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-12-02 10:58 ` Marco Elver
2021-12-02 11:44 ` Kefeng Wang
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=YadpsjyfdozccsOT@elver.google.com \
--to=elver@google.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox