Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-16 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:48:23 -0400 Sasha Levin wrote: > Steven, > > > Since the only objection raised was the too-newiness of GCC 4.9.2/5.0, what > would you consider a good time-line for removal? > > I haven't heard any "over my dead body" objections, so I guess that trying > to remove it wh

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-16 Thread Sasha Levin
On 03/11/2015 10:52 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> > Could you try KASan for your use case and see if it potentially uncovers >> > anything new? > The problem is, I don't have a setup to build with the latest compiler. > > I could build with my host compiler (that happens to be 4.9.2), but it > woul

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-12 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:43:29 -0400 Sasha Levin wrote: > On 03/11/2015 10:26 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >> There's no real hurry to kill kmemcheck right now, but we do want to stop > >> > supporting that in favour of KASan. > > Understood, but the kernel is suppose to support older compilers. > >

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-12 Thread Boaz Harrosh
On 03/11/2015 03:39 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 03/11/2015 08:40 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:34:46 -0400 >> Sasha Levin wrote: >> Fair enough. We knew there are existing kmemcheck users, but KASan should be superior both in performance and the scope of bugs

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread David Miller
From: Andrey Ryabinin Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 23:01:00 +0300 > 2015-03-11 21:44 GMT+03:00 David Miller : >> From: Sasha Levin >> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:25:47 -0400 >> >>> You're probably wondering why there are changes to SPARC in that patchset? >>> :) >> >> Libsanitizer doesn't even build ha

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread Andrey Ryabinin
2015-03-11 21:44 GMT+03:00 David Miller : > From: Sasha Levin > Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:25:47 -0400 > >> You're probably wondering why there are changes to SPARC in that patchset? :) > > Libsanitizer doesn't even build have the time on sparc, the release > manager has to hand patch it into build

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread David Miller
From: Sasha Levin Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:25:47 -0400 > You're probably wondering why there are changes to SPARC in that patchset? :) Libsanitizer doesn't even build have the time on sparc, the release manager has to hand patch it into building again every major release because of the way ASAN

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread Sasha Levin
On 03/11/2015 01:20 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Sasha Levin > Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 09:39:33 -0400 > >> > On 03/11/2015 08:40 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>> >> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:34:46 -0400 >>> >> Sasha Levin wrote: >>> >> > >>> > Fair enough. We knew there are existing kmemcheck u

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread David Miller
From: Sasha Levin Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 09:39:33 -0400 > On 03/11/2015 08:40 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:34:46 -0400 >> Sasha Levin wrote: >> >>> > Fair enough. We knew there are existing kmemcheck users, but KASan should >>> > be >>> > superior both in performance and

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread Sasha Levin
On 03/11/2015 10:26 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> There's no real hurry to kill kmemcheck right now, but we do want to stop >> > supporting that in favour of KASan. > Understood, but the kernel is suppose to support older compilers. > Perhaps we can keep kmemcheck for now and say it's obsoleted if y

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 09:39:33 -0400 Sasha Levin wrote: > On 03/11/2015 08:40 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:34:46 -0400 > > Sasha Levin wrote: > > > >> > Fair enough. We knew there are existing kmemcheck users, but KASan > >> > should be > >> > superior both in performance

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread Dave Jones
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 09:39:33AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 03/11/2015 08:40 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:34:46 -0400 > > Sasha Levin wrote: > > > >> > Fair enough. We knew there are existing kmemcheck users, but KASan > >> > should be > >> > superior both in

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread Sasha Levin
On 03/11/2015 08:40 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:34:46 -0400 > Sasha Levin wrote: > >> > Fair enough. We knew there are existing kmemcheck users, but KASan should >> > be >> > superior both in performance and the scope of bugs it finds. It also >> > shouldn't >> > impose n

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:34:46 -0400 Sasha Levin wrote: > Fair enough. We knew there are existing kmemcheck users, but KASan should be > superior both in performance and the scope of bugs it finds. It also shouldn't > impose new limitations beyond requiring gcc 4.9.2+. > Ouch! OK, then I can't use

Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck

2015-03-11 Thread Sasha Levin
On 03/11/2015 08:19 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > I removed the Cc list as it was so large, I'm sure that it exceeded the > LKML Cc size limit, and your email probably didn't make it to the list > (or any of them). Thanks. I'll resend in a bit if it doesn't show up on lkml.org. > On Wed, 11 Mar 201