Hello, and thanks for testing the series! On 2025-08-21 at 13:30:28 +0100, Ada Couprie Diaz wrote: >Hi, > >On 12/08/2025 14:23, Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote: >> [...] >> ======= Testing >> Checked all the kunits for both software tags and generic KASAN after >> making changes. >> >> In generic mode the results were: >> >> kasan: pass:59 fail:0 skip:13 total:72 >> Totals: pass:59 fail:0 skip:13 total:72 >> ok 1 kasan >> >> and for software tags: >> >> kasan: pass:63 fail:0 skip:9 total:72 >> Totals: pass:63 fail:0 skip:9 total:72 >> ok 1 kasan >I tested the series on arm64 and after fixing the build issues mentioned >I was able to boot without issues and did not observe any regressions >in the KASAN KUnit tests with either generic or software tags. > >So this is Tested-by: Ada Couprie Diaz <ada.coupriediaz@xxxxxxx> (For arm64) Thank you! I'll try to send the fixed series on monday/tuesday. >I will note that the tests `kmalloc_memmove_negative_size` and >`kmalloc_memmove_invalid_size` seem to be able to corrupt memory >and lead to kernel crashes if `memmove()` is not properly instrumented, >which I discovered while investigating [0]. What do you mean by 'properly instrumented'? Is it the intrinsic prefix thing for gcc that you mentioned? >> [...] >> ======= Compilation >> Clang was used to compile the series (make LLVM=1) since gcc doesn't >> seem to have support for KASAN tag-based compiler instrumentation on >> x86. > >Interestingly, while investigating [0], this comment slipped by me and >I managed to compile your series for x86 with software tags using GCC, >though it is a bit hacky. >You need to update the CC_HAS_KASAN_SW_TAGS to pass `-mlam=u48` >or `-mlam=u57`, as it is disabled by default, and pass `-march=arrowlake` >for compilation (the support for software tags depends on the arch). >You could then test with GCC (though the issue in [0] also applies to x86). Thanks! I'll try it out :) > >Best, >Ada -- Kind regards Maciej Wieczór-Retman
