Re: [PATCH v2] KASAN: prohibit KASAN+STRUCTLEAK combination

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 07:56:56AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> As a sanity check, I would count number of zeroing inserted by the
>> plugin it both cases and ensure that now it does not insert order of
>> magnitude more/less. It's easy with function calls (count them in
>> objdump output), not sure what's the easiest way to do it for inline
>> instrumentation. We could insert printf into the pass itself, but it
>> if runs before inlining and other optimization, it's not the final
>> number.
>
> I modified the structleak_plugin to count the number of initializations
> and output if the function was an inline function or not. The aggregated
> values are below.
>
> declared inline       no       yes
> ----------------------------------
> early_optimizations:  12168   7114
> *all_optimizations:   12554     13
>
> These numbers seem appropriate. The structleak initializes in declared
> inline functions are redundant.

Does this mean we end up with redundant initializers, or are they
optimized away in later passes?

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux