On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 2:22 AM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 15:55:32 +0800 Haibo Li <haibo.li@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Kernel test robot reported:
> >
> > '''
> > mm/kasan/report.c:637 kasan_non_canonical_hook() warn:
> > unsigned 'addr' is never less than zero.
> > '''
> > The KASAN_SHADOW_OFFSET is 0 on loongarch64.
> >
> > To fix it,check the KASAN_SHADOW_OFFSET before do comparison.
> >
> > --- a/mm/kasan/report.c
> > +++ b/mm/kasan/report.c
> > @@ -634,10 +634,10 @@ void kasan_non_canonical_hook(unsigned long addr)
> > {
> > unsigned long orig_addr;
> > const char *bug_type;
> > -
> > +#if KASAN_SHADOW_OFFSET > 0
> > if (addr < KASAN_SHADOW_OFFSET)
> > return;
> > -
> > +#endif
>
> We'd rather not add ugly ifdefs for a simple test like this. If we
> replace "<" with "<=", does it fix? I suspect that's wrong.
Changing the comparison into "<=" would be wrong.
But I actually don't think we need to fix anything here.
This issue looks quite close to a similar comparison with 0 issue
Linus shared his opinion on here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/Pine.LNX.4.58.0411230958260.20993@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
I don't know if the common consensus with the regard to issues like
that changed since then. But if not, perhaps we can treat this kernel
test robot report as a false positive.
Thanks!
