Re: [PATCH v5 00/18] Rework READ_ONCE() to improve codegen

[Marco Elver]

On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 15:55, David Laight <David.Laight@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Peter Zijlstra
> > Sent: 14 May 2020 15:25
> ..
> > Exact same requirements, KASAN even has the data_race() problem through
> > READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(), UBSAN doesn't and might be simpler because of it.
>
> What happens if you implement READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() with an
> asm() statement containing a memory load?
>
> Is that enough to kill all the instrumentation?

Yes, it is.

However, READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() for KASAN can be fixed if the problem is
randomly uninlined READ_ONCE_NOCHECK() in KASAN_SANITIZE := n
compilation units. KASAN's __no_kasan_or_inline is still conditionally
defined based on CONFIG_KASAN and not __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__. I'm about
to send a patch that does that for KASAN, since for KCSAN we've been
doing it for a while. However, if that was the exact problem Peter
observed I can't tell.

Thanks,
-- Marco