All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
	Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel\@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev\@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-s390\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kernel-hardening\@lists.openwall.com" 
	<kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] powerpc: Reduce ELF_ET_DYN_BASE
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 23:04:58 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8737amew79.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jK7aHHRMZyZyrviBF+cLghWcH_D4PX_vMFOycHuF7EdLA@mail.gmail.com>

Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:
>>
>>> Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>> position PIE binaries lower in the address space to avoid possible
>>> collisions with mmap or stack regions. For 64-bit, align to 4GB to
>>> allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit address space for 32-bit
>>> pointers.
>>
>> The change log and subject are a bit out of whack with the actual patch
>> because previously we used 512MB.
>>
>> How about?
>>
>>   powerpc: Move ELF_ET_DYN_BASE to 4GB / 4MB
>>
>>   Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>   we have more freedom to decide where we position PIE binaries in the
>>   address space to avoid possible collisions with mmap or stack regions.
>>
>>   For 64-bit, align to 4GB to allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit
>>   address space for 32-bit pointers. On 32-bit use 4MB.
>
> Good idea, thanks. I'll resend the series with the commit logs updated.
>
>> Is there any particular reasoning behind the 4MB value on 32-bit?
>
> So, I've dug around a bit on this, and I *think* the rationale is to
> avoid mapping a possible 4MB page table entry when it won't be using
> at least a portion near the lower end (NULL address area covered
> blocked by mmap_min_addr). It seems to be mainly tradition, though.

OK, that is obscure, especially for CPUs that don't have a 4MB page
size. But consistency across arches is probably best regardless.

cheers

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
	Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com"
	<kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 3/4] powerpc: Reduce ELF_ET_DYN_BASE
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 23:04:58 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8737amew79.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jK7aHHRMZyZyrviBF+cLghWcH_D4PX_vMFOycHuF7EdLA@mail.gmail.com>

Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:
>>
>>> Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>> position PIE binaries lower in the address space to avoid possible
>>> collisions with mmap or stack regions. For 64-bit, align to 4GB to
>>> allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit address space for 32-bit
>>> pointers.
>>
>> The change log and subject are a bit out of whack with the actual patch
>> because previously we used 512MB.
>>
>> How about?
>>
>>   powerpc: Move ELF_ET_DYN_BASE to 4GB / 4MB
>>
>>   Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>   we have more freedom to decide where we position PIE binaries in the
>>   address space to avoid possible collisions with mmap or stack regions.
>>
>>   For 64-bit, align to 4GB to allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit
>>   address space for 32-bit pointers. On 32-bit use 4MB.
>
> Good idea, thanks. I'll resend the series with the commit logs updated.
>
>> Is there any particular reasoning behind the 4MB value on 32-bit?
>
> So, I've dug around a bit on this, and I *think* the rationale is to
> avoid mapping a possible 4MB page table entry when it won't be using
> at least a portion near the lower end (NULL address area covered
> blocked by mmap_min_addr). It seems to be mainly tradition, though.

OK, that is obscure, especially for CPUs that don't have a 4MB page
size. But consistency across arches is probably best regardless.

cheers

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
	Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.c
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] powerpc: Reduce ELF_ET_DYN_BASE
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 23:04:58 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8737amew79.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jK7aHHRMZyZyrviBF+cLghWcH_D4PX_vMFOycHuF7EdLA@mail.gmail.com>

Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:
>>
>>> Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>> position PIE binaries lower in the address space to avoid possible
>>> collisions with mmap or stack regions. For 64-bit, align to 4GB to
>>> allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit address space for 32-bit
>>> pointers.
>>
>> The change log and subject are a bit out of whack with the actual patch
>> because previously we used 512MB.
>>
>> How about?
>>
>>   powerpc: Move ELF_ET_DYN_BASE to 4GB / 4MB
>>
>>   Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>   we have more freedom to decide where we position PIE binaries in the
>>   address space to avoid possible collisions with mmap or stack regions.
>>
>>   For 64-bit, align to 4GB to allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit
>>   address space for 32-bit pointers. On 32-bit use 4MB.
>
> Good idea, thanks. I'll resend the series with the commit logs updated.
>
>> Is there any particular reasoning behind the 4MB value on 32-bit?
>
> So, I've dug around a bit on this, and I *think* the rationale is to
> avoid mapping a possible 4MB page table entry when it won't be using
> at least a portion near the lower end (NULL address area covered
> blocked by mmap_min_addr). It seems to be mainly tradition, though.

OK, that is obscure, especially for CPUs that don't have a 4MB page
size. But consistency across arches is probably best regardless.

cheers

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
	Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com"
	<kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] powerpc: Reduce ELF_ET_DYN_BASE
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 23:04:58 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8737amew79.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
Message-ID: <20170626130458.pERhW3G532RIpPuNL-JzyguzkkxDOqFbla3q5_KbU1U@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jK7aHHRMZyZyrviBF+cLghWcH_D4PX_vMFOycHuF7EdLA@mail.gmail.com>

Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:
>>
>>> Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>> position PIE binaries lower in the address space to avoid possible
>>> collisions with mmap or stack regions. For 64-bit, align to 4GB to
>>> allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit address space for 32-bit
>>> pointers.
>>
>> The change log and subject are a bit out of whack with the actual patch
>> because previously we used 512MB.
>>
>> How about?
>>
>>   powerpc: Move ELF_ET_DYN_BASE to 4GB / 4MB
>>
>>   Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>   we have more freedom to decide where we position PIE binaries in the
>>   address space to avoid possible collisions with mmap or stack regions.
>>
>>   For 64-bit, align to 4GB to allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit
>>   address space for 32-bit pointers. On 32-bit use 4MB.
>
> Good idea, thanks. I'll resend the series with the commit logs updated.
>
>> Is there any particular reasoning behind the 4MB value on 32-bit?
>
> So, I've dug around a bit on this, and I *think* the rationale is to
> avoid mapping a possible 4MB page table entry when it won't be using
> at least a portion near the lower end (NULL address area covered
> blocked by mmap_min_addr). It seems to be mainly tradition, though.

OK, that is obscure, especially for CPUs that don't have a 4MB page
size. But consistency across arches is probably best regardless.

cheers

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: mpe@ellerman.id.au (Michael Ellerman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] powerpc: Reduce ELF_ET_DYN_BASE
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 23:04:58 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8737amew79.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jK7aHHRMZyZyrviBF+cLghWcH_D4PX_vMFOycHuF7EdLA@mail.gmail.com>

Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:
>>
>>> Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>> position PIE binaries lower in the address space to avoid possible
>>> collisions with mmap or stack regions. For 64-bit, align to 4GB to
>>> allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit address space for 32-bit
>>> pointers.
>>
>> The change log and subject are a bit out of whack with the actual patch
>> because previously we used 512MB.
>>
>> How about?
>>
>>   powerpc: Move ELF_ET_DYN_BASE to 4GB / 4MB
>>
>>   Now that explicitly executed loaders are loaded in the mmap region,
>>   we have more freedom to decide where we position PIE binaries in the
>>   address space to avoid possible collisions with mmap or stack regions.
>>
>>   For 64-bit, align to 4GB to allow runtimes to use the entire 32-bit
>>   address space for 32-bit pointers. On 32-bit use 4MB.
>
> Good idea, thanks. I'll resend the series with the commit logs updated.
>
>> Is there any particular reasoning behind the 4MB value on 32-bit?
>
> So, I've dug around a bit on this, and I *think* the rationale is to
> avoid mapping a possible 4MB page table entry when it won't be using
> at least a portion near the lower end (NULL address area covered
> blocked by mmap_min_addr). It seems to be mainly tradition, though.

OK, that is obscure, especially for CPUs that don't have a 4MB page
size. But consistency across arches is probably best regardless.

cheers

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-26 13:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-22 18:06 [PATCH 0/4] Reduce ELF_ET_DYN_BASE Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06 ` Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06 ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06 ` [PATCH 1/4] arm: " Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06   ` Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06   ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: " Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06   ` Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06   ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2017-06-23  6:57   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-23  6:57     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-23  6:57     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-23  6:57     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-23 13:52     ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 13:52       ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 13:52       ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 13:52       ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 14:02       ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 14:02         ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 14:02         ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 14:02         ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 15:04         ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-23 15:04           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-23 15:04           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-23 15:04           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-22 18:06 ` [PATCH 3/4] powerpc: " Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06   ` Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06   ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2017-06-23  7:01   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-23  7:01     ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-23  7:01     ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-23  7:01     ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-23  7:01     ` [kernel-hardening] " Michael Ellerman
2017-06-23 20:08     ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 20:08       ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 20:08       ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 20:08       ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 20:08       ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2017-06-26 13:04       ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2017-06-26 13:04         ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-26 13:04         ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-26 13:04         ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-26 13:04         ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-26 13:04         ` [kernel-hardening] " Michael Ellerman
2017-06-26 18:26         ` Kees Cook
2017-06-26 18:26           ` Kees Cook
2017-06-26 18:26           ` Kees Cook
2017-06-26 18:26           ` Kees Cook
2017-06-26 18:26           ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06 ` [PATCH 4/4] s390: " Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06   ` Kees Cook
2017-06-22 18:06   ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8737amew79.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au \
    --to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=panand@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.