search for: have_arch_kasan

...r reactive. I'd like to address a way to properly ensure we don't run into this and other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep doing this reactively. Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be selected on x86 when: if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable distributions to be able to have a single binary kernels and let the rest be figured out, so we can't just disable SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP for Xen alone, w...

...r reactive. I'd like to address a way to properly ensure we don't run into this and other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep doing this reactively. Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be selected on x86 when: if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable distributions to be able to have a single binary kernels and let the rest be figured out, so we can't just disable SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP for Xen alone, w...

...properly ensure we don't run into this and >> other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another >> recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep >> doing this reactively. >> >> Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be >> selected on x86 when: >> >> if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP >> >> Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable > > Why? Again, this is the first I've heard of this as well. FWIW, all > the Xen configs we us...

...properly ensure we don't run into this and >> other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another >> recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep >> doing this reactively. >> >> Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be >> selected on x86 when: >> >> if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP >> >> Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable > > Why? Again, this is the first I've heard of this as well. FWIW, all > the Xen configs we us...

...to address a way to properly ensure we don't run into this and > other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another > recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep > doing this reactively. > > Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be > selected on x86 when: > > if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP > > Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable Why? Again, this is the first I've heard of this as well. FWIW, all the Xen configs we use have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP enabled...

...to address a way to properly ensure we don't run into this and > other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another > recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep > doing this reactively. > > Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be > selected on x86 when: > > if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP > > Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable Why? Again, this is the first I've heard of this as well. FWIW, all the Xen configs we use have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP enabled...

...to address a way to properly ensure we don't run into this and > other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another > recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep > doing this reactively. > > Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be > selected on x86 when: > > if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP > > Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable > distributions to be able to have a single binary kernels and let the > rest be figured out, so we can't just disable...

...to address a way to properly ensure we don't run into this and > other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another > recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep > doing this reactively. > > Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be > selected on x86 when: > > if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP > > Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable > distributions to be able to have a single binary kernels and let the > rest be figured out, so we can't just disable...

...don't run into this and >>> other similar issues in the future. The CR4 shadow issue was another >>> recent example issue, also introduced via v4.0 [0]. We can't keep >>> doing this reactively. >>> >>> Let's go down the rabbit hole for a bit. HAVE_ARCH_KASAN will be >>> selected on x86 when: >>> >>> if X86_64 && SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP >>> >>> Now Xen should not have SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP but PVOPs' goal is to enable >> >> Why? Again, this is the first I've heard of this as well. FWIW, al...