On 2025-02-25 at 22:37:58 +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: >On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 6:21 PM Maciej Wieczor-Retman ><maciej.wieczor-retman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> I wanted to have the shadow memory boundries aligned properly, to not waste page >> >> table entries, so the memory map is more straight forward. This patch helps with >> >> that, I don't think it would have worked without it. >> > >> >Ok, I see - let's add this info into the commit message then. >> >> Sure, but if you like the 0xffeffc0000000000 offset I'll just drop this part. > >Sure, assuming it works, I like this address :) But to be fair, I like >any fixed address better than using a runtime const, just to avoid the >complexity. Btw just out of curiosity on the topic. If we used a runtime specified kasan offset, could the gdb script issue (not knowing the offset at compile-time) be fixed by just exporting the value through sysfs? I know that in inline mode the compiler would still need to know the offset value but I was curious if this approach was okay at least in outline mode? -- Kind regards Maciej Wieczór-Retman
