Re: [Xen-devel] kasan_map_early_shadow() on Xen
From: David Vrabel
Date: Tue Mar 03 2015 - 05:07:05 EST
On 03/03/15 09:40, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Andrey,
>
> I believe that on Xen we should disable kasan, would like confirmation
Why? This is the first of heard of this.
> from someone on xen-devel though. Here's the thing though -- if true
> -- I'd like to do it *properly*, where *properly* means addressing a
> bit of architecture. A simple Kconfig slap seems rather reactive. I'd
> like to address a way to properly ensure we don't run into this and
> other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another
> recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep
> doing this reactively.
>
> Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be
> selected on x86 when:
>
> if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
>
> Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable
Why? Again, this is the first I've heard of this as well. FWIW, all
the Xen configs we use have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP enabled.
David
> distributions to be able to have a single binary kernels and let the
> rest be figured out, so we can't just disable SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP for
> Xen alone, we want to build Xen.. or part of Xen and perhaps keep
> SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, and only later figure things out.
>
> How do we do this cleanly and avoid future reactive measures? If the
> answer is not upon us, I'd like to at least highlight the issue so
> that in case we do come up with something its no surprise PVOPs is
> falling short for that single binary pipe dream right now.
>
> [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/23/328
>
> Luis
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/