Messages in this thread | | | From | Dmitry Vyukov <> | Date | Thu, 13 Feb 2020 06:39:50 +0100 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] UML: add support for KASAN under x86_64 |
| |
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:25 PM Patricia Alfonso <trishalfonso@google.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 1:19 AM Patricia Alfonso > > <trishalfonso@google.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 12:53 AM Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > +void kasan_init(void) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + kasan_map_memory((void *)KASAN_SHADOW_START, KASAN_SHADOW_SIZE); > > > > > + > > > > > + // unpoison the kernel text which is form uml_physmem -> uml_reserved > > > > > + kasan_unpoison_shadow((void *)uml_physmem, physmem_size); > > > > > + > > > > > + // unpoison the vmalloc region, which is start_vm -> end_vm > > > > > + kasan_unpoison_shadow((void *)start_vm, (end_vm - start_vm + 1)); > > > > > + > > > > > + init_task.kasan_depth = 0; > > > > > + pr_info("KernelAddressSanitizer initialized\n"); > > > > > +} > > > > > > > > Was this tested with stack instrumentation? Stack instrumentation > > > > changes what shadow is being read/written and when. We don't need to > > > > get it working right now, but if it does not work it would be nice to > > > > restrict the setting and leave some comment traces for future > > > > generations. > > > If you are referring to KASAN_STACK_ENABLE, I just tested it and it > > > seems to work fine. > > > > > > I mean stack instrumentation which is enabled with CONFIG_KASAN_STACK. > > I believe I was testing with CONFIG_KASAN_STACK set to 1 since that is > the default value when compiling with GCC.The syscall_stub_data error > disappears when the value of CONFIG_KASAN_STACK is 0, though.
Then I would either disable it for now for UML, or try to unpoision stack or ignore accesses.
| |