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;
Date:   Fri, 21 Feb 2020 13:50:39 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Cc:     Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com>,
        tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, hpa@zytor.com,
        rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/11] x86: make sure _etext includes function
 sections
Message-ID: <20200221195039.dptvoerfez4r76ay@treble>
References: <75f0bd0365857ba4442ee69016b63764a8d2ad68.camel@linux.intel.com>
 <B413445A-F1F0-4FB7-AA9F-C5FF4CEFF5F5@amacapital.net>
 <20200207092423.GC14914@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <202002091742.7B1E6BF19@keescook>
 <20200210105117.GE14879@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <43b7ba31-6dca-488b-8a0e-72d9fdfd1a6b@linux.intel.com>
 <20200210163627.GA1829035@rani.riverdale.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200210163627.GA1829035@rani.riverdale.lan>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:36:29AM -0500, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 07:54:58AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > 
> > > I'll leave it to others to figure out the exact details. But afaict it
> > > should be possible to have fine-grained-randomization and preserve the
> > > workaround in the end.
> > > 
> > 
> > the most obvious "solution" is to compile with an alignment of 4 bytes (so tight packing)
> > and then in the randomizer preserve the offset within 32 bytes, no matter what it is
> > 
> > that would get you an average padding of 16 bytes which is a bit more than now but not too insane
> > (queue Kees' argument that tiny bits of padding are actually good)
> > 
> 
> With the patchset for adding the mbranches-within-32B-boundaries option,
> the section alignment gets forced to 32. With function-sections that
> means function alignment has to be 32 too.

We should be careful about enabling -mbranches-within-32B-boundaries.
It will hurt AMD, and presumably future Intel CPUs which don't need it.

-- 
Josh