From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Alexander Popov <alex.popov@linux.com>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
PaX Team <pageexec@freemail.hu>,
Brad Spengler <spender@grsecurity.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Dmitry V . Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>,
Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
Kyle Huey <me@kylehuey.com>,
Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@virtuozzo.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v9 2/7] x86/entry: Add STACKLEAK erasing the kernel stack at the end of syscalls
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 21:25:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180305202535.GX25201@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <94f268b2-31a4-620a-86ed-325d5bb33c57@redhat.com>
On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 11:43:19AM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 03/05/2018 08:41 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On 03/03/2018 12:00 PM, Alexander Popov wrote:
> > > Documentation/x86/x86_64/mm.txt | 2 +
> > > arch/Kconfig | 27 ++++++++++
> > > arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S | 108 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > arch/x86/entry/entry_64_compat.S | 11 ++++
> >
> > This is a *lot* of assembly. I wonder if you tried at all to get more
> > of this into C or whether you just inherited the assembly from the
> > original code?
> >
>
> This came up previously http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2017/10/23/5
> there were concerns about trusting C to do the right thing as well as
> speed.
And therefore the answer to this obvious question should've been part of
the Changelog :-)
Dave is last in a long line of people asking this same question.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-05 20:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-03 20:00 [PATCH RFC v9 0/7] Introduce the STACKLEAK feature and a test for it Alexander Popov
2018-03-03 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC v9 1/7] gcc-plugins: Clean up the cgraph_create_edge* macros Alexander Popov
2018-03-03 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC v9 2/7] x86/entry: Add STACKLEAK erasing the kernel stack at the end of syscalls Alexander Popov
2018-03-05 16:41 ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-05 19:43 ` Laura Abbott
2018-03-05 19:50 ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-05 20:25 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2018-03-05 21:21 ` Alexander Popov
2018-03-05 21:36 ` Kees Cook
2018-03-21 11:04 ` Alexander Popov
2018-03-21 15:33 ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-22 20:56 ` Alexander Popov
2018-03-26 17:32 ` Kees Cook
2018-03-26 17:43 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-03-03 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC v9 3/7] gcc-plugins: Add STACKLEAK plugin for tracking the kernel stack Alexander Popov
2018-03-03 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC v9 4/7] x86/entry: Erase kernel stack in syscall_trace_enter() Alexander Popov
2018-03-05 19:40 ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-05 20:06 ` Kees Cook
2018-03-05 20:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-05 21:02 ` Alexander Popov
2018-03-05 21:02 ` Kees Cook
2018-03-05 21:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-05 22:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 0:56 ` Kees Cook
2018-03-06 4:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 17:58 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-03-06 7:56 ` [OLD PATCH] net: recvmsg: Unconditionally zero struct sockaddr_storage " Ingo Molnar
2018-03-06 8:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-03-06 15:16 ` Daniel Micay
2018-03-06 15:28 ` Daniel Micay
2018-03-06 18:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 19:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-06 19:07 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-03-06 19:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 20:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-03-06 21:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 21:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-03-06 21:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 22:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-03-06 22:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 21:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-06 21:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 21:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 22:29 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-06 22:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-06 22:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-06 23:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-12 8:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-03-12 9:00 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-03-12 9:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-03-06 21:47 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-03-06 22:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-05 20:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-03 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC v9 5/7] lkdtm: Add a test for STACKLEAK Alexander Popov
2018-03-03 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC v9 6/7] fs/proc: Show STACKLEAK metrics in the /proc file system Alexander Popov
2018-03-03 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC v9 7/7] doc: self-protection: Add information about STACKLEAK feature Alexander Popov
2018-03-05 19:34 ` [PATCH RFC v9 0/7] Introduce the STACKLEAK feature and a test for it Kees Cook
2018-03-05 19:42 ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-05 20:02 ` 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=20180305202535.GX25201@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.popov@linux.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dingtianhong@huawei.com \
--cc=dsafonov@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jbacik@fb.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=labbott@redhat.com \
--cc=ldv@altlinux.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=me@kylehuey.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=minipli@googlemail.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=pageexec@freemail.hu \
--cc=re.emese@gmail.com \
--cc=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=spender@grsecurity.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thgarnie@google.com \
--cc=tycho@tycho.ws \
--cc=vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).