From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU without constructors (was Re: [PATCH v4 13/17] khwasan: add hooks implementation) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 04:28:47 -0700 Message-ID: References: <01000164f169bc6b-c73a8353-d7d9-47ec-a782-90aadcb86bfb-000000@email.amazonses.com> <30ee6c72-dc90-275a-8e23-54221f393cb0@virtuozzo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andrey Ryabinin , Linus Torvalds , Christoph Lameter , Theodore Ts'o , Jan Kara , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Pablo Neira Ayuso , Jozsef Kadlecsik , Florian Westphal , David Miller , NetFilter , coreteam@netfilter.org, Network Development , Gerrit Renker , dccp@vger.kernel.org, Jani Nikula , Joonas Lahtinen , Rodrigo Vivi , Dave Airlie , To: Dmitry Vyukov , Eric Dumazet Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On 08/01/2018 03:34 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> On 08/01/2018 02:03 AM, Andrey Ryabinin wrote: >> >>> I can't think of any advantage in not having the constructor. >> >> I can't see any advantage adding another indirect call, >> in RETPOLINE world. > > Can you please elaborate what's the problem here? > If slab ctor call have RETPOLINE, then using ctors more does not > introduce any security problems and they are not _that_ slow. They _are_ slow, when we have dozens of them in a code path. I object "having to add" yet another indirect call, if this can be avoided [*] If some people want to use ctor, fine, but do not request this. [*] This can be tricky, but worth the pain.