Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:16:42 +0300 | From | Andrey Ryabinin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 01/12] Add kernel address sanitizer infrastructure. |
| |
On 11/25/2014 03:40 PM, Dmitry Chernenkov wrote: > I'm a little concerned with how enabling/disabling works. If an > enable() is forgotten once, it's disabled forever. If disable() is > forgotten once, the toggle is reversed for the forseable future. MB > check for inequality in kasan_enabled()? like current->kasan_depth >= > 0 (will need a signed int for the field). Do you think it's going to > decrease performance?
I think that check in kasan_enabled shouldn't hurt much. But it also doesn't look very useful for me.
There are only few user of kasan_disable_local/kasan_enable_local, it's easy to review them. And in future we also shouldn't have a lot of new users of those functions.
> > LGTM > >
| |