On 04.06.2020 17:25, Jann Horn wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 4:21 PM Alexander Popov <alex.popov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 04.06.2020 17:14, Jann Horn wrote: >>> Maybe at some point we should replace exclusions based on >>> GCC_PLUGINS_CFLAGS and KASAN_SANITIZE and UBSAN_SANITIZE and >>> OBJECT_FILES_NON_STANDARD and so on with something more generic... >>> something that says "this file will not be built into the normal >>> kernel, it contains code that runs in realmode / userspace / some >>> similarly weird context, and none of our instrumentation >>> infrastructure is available there"... >> >> Good idea. I would also add 'notrace' to that list. > > Hm? notrace code should definitely still be subject to sanitizer > instrumentation. I mean ftrace is sometimes disabled for functions that are executed in those weird contexts. As well as kcov instrumentation. It would be nice if that generic mechanism could help with choosing which kernel code instrumentation technologies should be disabled in the given context. Best regards, Alexander
