On 5/2/16 19:34, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 7:36 AM, <chengang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: Chen Gang <chengang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> According to kasan_[dis|en]able_current() comments and the kasan_depth' >> s initialization, if kasan_depth is zero, it means disable. > The comments for those functions are really poor, but there's nothing > there that says kasan_depth==0 disables KASAN. > Actually, kasan_report_enabled() is currently the only place that > denotes the semantics of kasan_depth, so it couldn't be wrong. > > init_task.kasan_depth is 1 during bootstrap and is then set to zero by > kasan_init() > For every other thread, current->kasan_depth is zero-initialized. > OK, what you said sound reasonable to me. and do you also mean: - kasan_depth == 0 means enable KASAN, others means disable KASAN. - If always let kasan_[en|dis]able_current() be pair, and notice about the overflow, it should be OK: "kasan_enable_current() can let kasan_depth++, and kasan_disable_current() will let kasan_depth--". - If we check the related overflow, "kasan_depth == 1" mean "the KASAN should be always in disable state". Thanks. -- Chen Gang (陈刚) Managing Natural Environments is the Duty of Human Beings. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>