On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 01:01:08PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 12:35 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 11:29:45AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > When CONFIG_KASAN is selected, <linux/kasan-checks.h> defines the > > > > prototypes for kasan_check_{read,write}(), rather than inline stubs. > > > > > > +kasan-...@googlegroups.com > > > > > > Doesn't this do the same as? > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/kasan-dev/NwEdpGgUeac/oXUIRUC6CAAJ > > > > I had missed that patch -- thanks for the pointer! > > > > Either patch should both fix the issue with the EFI stub, but the > > __kasan_check*() renaming in this patch also prevents unexpected > > instrumentation within mm/kasan/common.c, if a call to kasan_check_*() > > were inlined there. > > > > If you think that robustness is worthwhile, I can spin a v2 making that > > a bit clearer, and fix the logic to look at __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ rather > > than adding the KASAN_NOSANITIZE definition. > > > > AFAICT Arnd's patch isn't queued anywhere just yet. > > I dunno. I don't have strong preference. > Also not sure if Arnd's patch is not, say, in mm... problems of > extremely long patch submission times... patches should take at most > days to commit.
I see Arnd's patch is in linux-next today, so it looks like that's solved. I'll drop this patch unless we see any other problems. Thanks, Mark.