>> - I don't understand why this is necessary. memory_is_poisoned_16()
>> already handles unaligned addresses?
>>
>> - If it's needed on ARM then presumably it will be needed on other
>> architectures, so CONFIG_ARM is insufficiently general.
>>
>> - If the present memory_is_poisoned_16() indeed doesn't work on ARM,
>> it would be better to generalize/fix it in some fashion rather than
>> creating a new variant of the function.
>Yes, I think it will be better to fix the current function rather then
>have 2 slightly different copies with ifdef's.
>Will something along these lines work for arm? 16-byte accesses are
>not too common, so it should not be a performance problem. And
>probably modern compilers can turn 2 1-byte checks into a 2-byte check
>where safe (x86).
>static __always_inline bool memory_is_poisoned_16(unsigned long addr)
>{
> u8 *shadow_addr = (u8 *)kasan_mem_to_shadow((void *)addr);
>
> if (shadow_addr[0] || shadow_addr[1])
> return true;
> /* Unaligned 16-bytes access maps into 3 shadow bytes. */
> if (unlikely(!IS_ALIGNED(addr, KASAN_SHADOW_SCALE_SIZE)))
> return memory_is_poisoned_1(addr + 15);
> return false;
>}
Thanks for Andrew Morton and Dmitry Vyukov's review.
If the parameter addr=0xc0000008, now in function:
static __always_inline bool memory_is_poisoned_16(unsigned long addr)
{
--- //shadow_addr = (u16 *)(KASAN_OFFSET+0x18000001(=0xc0000008>>3)) is not
--- // unsigned by 2 bytes.
u16 *shadow_addr = (u16 *)kasan_mem_to_shadow((void *)addr);
/* Unaligned 16-bytes access maps into 3 shadow bytes. */
if (unlikely(!IS_ALIGNED(addr, KASAN_SHADOW_SCALE_SIZE)))
return *shadow_addr || memory_is_poisoned_1(addr + 15);
---- //here is going to be error on arm, specially when kernel has not finished yet.
---- //Because the unsigned accessing cause DataAbort Exception which is not
---- //initialized when kernel is starting.
return *shadow_addr;
}
I also think it is better to fix this problem.
��.n������g��� �a��� �&ޖ)���)��h���&������梷���� �Ǟ�m������)������^�����������v���O��zf������
