On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 09:39:33 -0400 Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/11/2015 08:40 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:34:46 -0400 > > Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> > Fair enough. We knew there are existing kmemcheck users, but KASan should be > >> > superior both in performance and the scope of bugs it finds. It also shouldn't > >> > impose new limitations beyond requiring gcc 4.9.2+. > >> > > > Ouch! OK, then I can't use it. I'm currently compiling with gcc 4.6.3. > > > > It will be a while before I upgrade my build farm to something newer. > > Are you actually compiling new kernels with 4.6.3, or are you using older > kernels as well? Yes for both :-) > > There's no real hurry to kill kmemcheck right now, but we do want to stop > supporting that in favour of KASan. Understood, but the kernel is suppose to support older compilers. Perhaps we can keep kmemcheck for now and say it's obsoleted if you have a newer compiler. Because it will be a while before I upgrade my compilers. I don't upgrade unless I have a good reason to do so. Not sure KASan fulfills that requirement. -- Steve -- 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>