On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Vaneet Narang wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> >>> Do you actually hit an issue with image size? In what context?
>> >>> Do you use inline/outline instrumentation? Does switching to the other
>> >>> option help?
>>
Hi,
>>> Do you actually hit an issue with image size? In what context?
>>> Do you use inline/outline instrumentation? Does switching to the other
>>> option help?
>>
>> Memory access with KASAN enabled Image has overhead in terms of cpu
>> execution.
>> Sometimes we are not able to reproduce race
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Vaneet Narang wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Do you actually hit an issue with image size? In what context?
>> Do you use inline/outline instrumentation? Does switching to the other
>> option help?
>
> Memory access with KASAN enabled Image has overhead in terms of cpu execut
Hi,
> Do you actually hit an issue with image size? In what context?
> Do you use inline/outline instrumentation? Does switching to the other
> option help?
Memory access with KASAN enabled Image has overhead in terms of cpu execution.
Sometimes we are not able to reproduce race condition issues
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Maninder Singh
wrote:
> This provide option to control sanity of read and write operations
> Both read and write instrumentation increase size of uImage, So using
> this option read or write instrumentation can be avoided if not required.
> Useful in case of modul
5 matches
Mail list logo
