Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp1261269wrg; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:15:55 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227oL9bXxhRBOkGQpQxIF7VfKySR8ysniCkZdtxkNpwVtqEWDtKnW7w2oSmUBpUHpYdL6BAX X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7b98:: with SMTP id w24-v6mr473875pll.328.1518646555355; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:15:55 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1518646555; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=zRQ9KomOgD+uo0F2Shg9kTAQlMA5koXA1K9nKM+G35gnEu9u5nYil95B9y+FArD9T9 X7IrT4viNwdy0qBRLlq1HOIIv2WZt/merhY2RoMB0Nd3NZi4ZrswqMT7uJPrkzEXsS8L pGAhd2NjIYFLiUbsVHIaEdZ5LcQSdR7ne/BX13XxcbiNGdxgvYiPgrUepZBeymRpdg1x R8pNLfeZDjsOkPOyr71rKKqkxHcxryCqM7rZMJ0DyGYv1iPElhLDGH0D42mIp9iCdKZy alFgv3FdmY3RyNq8FV4pBE6dTD+Q9HigekBhD7/v0LsWSK7Y5iqhlNgRR7uPviy3zJPP SBwQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=1I5emYBdMczpmvIvlKtYj1XMEMflhndJ0aLrBKYk+N8=; b=dzwlya0iehck80jtAOnL/3iJ0RV5lLZOD3vYLe5fucVbplpToXD3DFhNvLjF28avMM thFMDh4qzYzZEyKaSmAh/YCozW8GOroZmpse40+KVe9aVZeWSCCG4+KCO62bU+Cmg8/n 3pw0fMuZ2Z/hXDPmtYryhj2T1DpaMYsDzL4xepPHzcF4KYVSYUmWS9xSBM4IIgwrLCXh x2rslAqM+EottyXYDJS0un/tgTrPPrOgYV6J4OPNTdkgpCJdzYf4yFQtDVyzrp+8Yy3N occiSuOKeZx9941n4NFU4BA5x9o7VdCRoEztDO5s5ql6IHurmJ9cVY1Qwa+3wCQXMskm Gxhw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@tycho-ws.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=BVh2o/MN; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n7si1586054pga.670.2018.02.14.14.15.40; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:15:55 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@tycho-ws.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=BVh2o/MN; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031793AbeBNWNe (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:13:34 -0500 Received: from mail-pl0-f65.google.com ([209.85.160.65]:42914 "EHLO mail-pl0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031551AbeBNWNb (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:13:31 -0500 Received: by mail-pl0-f65.google.com with SMTP id 31so3803553ple.9 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:13:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tycho-ws.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=1I5emYBdMczpmvIvlKtYj1XMEMflhndJ0aLrBKYk+N8=; b=BVh2o/MNtt1OXOzs9rOoaVsIROCtcIupEVTgBT3i6mEnynY60Mr2MjjbWvUbWgOmTT bZSAxlUH7aI+XbByDmo7u6yQkiQMihh3y/mzNEbllgFuW/QjXGx/CEQeoQ14u48Iqp5b RkEheLx2liEfkKlBL2Hc+ZtXbmCUZjfyCYeXvm0EF/4SBI11bhhwiopNcFOhATeVMoYv EC5oE5aByxW3mIkWxhaI+/9P1V8tsRcit2wz0CFZ2ZUQYxYsl2urMMsgIDik77q9eeGR zCHYP0LPLjiWpk0LAiQecfpM82uxY3AI0ujRbqqIKCBR8Xj/nluudvW0LZKc6/V5lntF G2sg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=1I5emYBdMczpmvIvlKtYj1XMEMflhndJ0aLrBKYk+N8=; b=Y9cWY7sw7dpfmqi19LB0EtfYF/WGF/qZPHX9nhG0mIltxi9s9ZnvLB1mgGI2U7jwTE M3eD2GQE81r3dQ9E2AaNAIdijcfvVmFPvE/Ih7jjSComkZaNiMQz3C2vN2r2ykenWqJk 0hMqwKvSNIvi4zznyQzxjHMgYHx3+j22uRJHZH2aJOBv7zMR6NHtFRVvNNtaqbovQJtn NNiaI2KNw7YcKKuzfizIWY6EAsuBkpEQoGfy9z9jv8bogKTZsnDuwqawikOVaYPQgHqm rgzPIwlxmYQt8OwV+F/JfgAFkJL07kHewT3S1347OalUDFxzuVQgFwJv2nhQNbBVDR3r k5MA== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPCXqe2qvJasAYfWlayTXv9rRfozQ94+gTcriIbOp0H9GzXoEuHm jYVcI113MnguxlRB5d8Npq+Nkw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:5186:: with SMTP id y6-v6mr463054plh.188.1518646411219; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:13:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from cisco ([128.107.241.167]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c185sm41058162pfb.146.2018.02.14.14.13.28 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:13:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:13:28 -0700 From: Tycho Andersen To: Kees Cook Cc: Laura Abbott , Jann Horn , Igor Stoppa , Boris Lukashev , Christopher Lameter , Matthew Wilcox , Jerome Glisse , Michal Hocko , Christoph Hellwig , linux-security-module , Linux-MM , kernel list , Kernel Hardening , linux-arm-kernel Subject: Re: arm64 physmap (was Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 4/6] Protectable Memory) Message-ID: <20180214221328.glbrdib3wumve53z@cisco> References: <17e5b515-84c8-dca2-1695-cdf819834ea2@huawei.com> <414027d3-dd73-cf11-dc2a-e8c124591646@redhat.com> <2f23544a-bd24-1e71-967b-e8d1cf5a20a3@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:48:38AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Laura Abbott wrote: > > fixed. Modules yes are not fully protected. The conclusion from past > > experience has been that we cannot safely break down larger page sizes > > at runtime like x86 does. We could theoretically > > add support for fixing up the alias if PAGE_POISONING is enabled but > > I don't know who would actually use that in production. Performance > > is very poor at that point. > > XPFO forces 4K pages on the physmap[1] for similar reasons. I have no > doubt about performance changes, but I'd be curious to see real > numbers. Did anyone do benchmarks on just the huge/4K change? (Without > also the XPFO overhead?) > > If this, XPFO, and PAGE_POISONING all need it, I think we have to > start a closer investigation. :) I haven't but it shouldn't be too hard. What benchmarks are you thinking? Tycho