Re: [PINGv2][PATCH] Ignore alignment by option

2014-12-04 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 08:26:24PM +0300, Yuri Gribov wrote: > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 8:06 PM, 'Dmitry Vyukov' via address-sanitizer > wrote: > > You answered your own question about user space :) > > Yeah, I hoped someone would rush to overpersuade me... While in C unaligned accesses are UB, I

Re: [PINGv2][PATCH] Ignore alignment by option

2014-12-04 Thread Yuri Gribov
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 8:06 PM, 'Dmitry Vyukov' via address-sanitizer wrote: > You answered your own question about user space :) Yeah, I hoped someone would rush to overpersuade me... -Y

Re: [PINGv2][PATCH] Ignore alignment by option

2014-12-04 Thread Dmitry Vyukov
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Yury Gribov wrote: > On 12/04/2014 05:04 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Yury Gribov wrote: >>> >>> On 12/04/2014 03:47 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: size_in_bytes = -1 instrumentation is too slow to be the default in k

Re: [PINGv2][PATCH] Ignore alignment by option

2014-12-04 Thread Yury Gribov
On 12/04/2014 05:04 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Yury Gribov wrote: On 12/04/2014 03:47 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: size_in_bytes = -1 instrumentation is too slow to be the default in kernel. If we want to pursue this, I propose a different scheme. Handle 8+ byte acc

Re: [PINGv2][PATCH] Ignore alignment by option

2014-12-04 Thread Dmitry Vyukov
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Yury Gribov wrote: > On 12/04/2014 03:47 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> >> size_in_bytes = -1 instrumentation is too slow to be the default in >> kernel. >> >> If we want to pursue this, I propose a different scheme. >> Handle 8+ byte accesses as 1/2/4 accesses. No cha

Re: [PINGv2][PATCH] Ignore alignment by option

2014-12-04 Thread Yury Gribov
On 12/04/2014 03:47 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: size_in_bytes = -1 instrumentation is too slow to be the default in kernel. If we want to pursue this, I propose a different scheme. Handle 8+ byte accesses as 1/2/4 accesses. No changes to 1/2/4 access handling. Currently when we allocate, say, 17-by

Re: [PINGv2][PATCH] Ignore alignment by option

2014-12-04 Thread Dmitry Vyukov
+address-sanitizer Please don't hurry with it. Do you have any numbers on how frequent are unaligned accesses in kernel? Is it worth addressing at this cost? size_in_bytes = -1 instrumentation is too slow to be the default in kernel. If we want to pursue this, I propose a different scheme. Hand

[PINGv2][PATCH] Ignore alignment by option

2014-12-04 Thread Marat Zakirov
On 11/27/2014 05:14 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote: On 11/19/2014 06:01 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote: Hi all! Here is the patch which forces ASan to ignore alignment of memory access. It increases ASan overhead but it's still useful because some programs like linux kernel often cheat with alignment whi