Re: [PATCH v11 00/11] x86: PIE support to extend KASLR randomization

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 10:21:36AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> But at what cost; it does unspeakable ugly to the asm. And didn't a
> kernel compiled with the extended PIE range produce a measurably slower
> kernel due to all the ugly?

Was that true? I thought the final results were a wash and that earlier
benchmarks weren't accurate for some reason? I can't find the thread
now. Thomas, do you have numbers on that?

BTW, I totally agree that fgkaslr is the way to go in the future. I
am mostly arguing for this under the assumption that it doesn't
have meaningful performance impact and that it gains the kernel some
flexibility in the kinds of things it can do in the future. If the former
is not true, then I'd agree, the benefit needs to be more clear.

-- 
Kees Cook
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization



[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux