linux-kernel - Re: RFC: A reduced Linux network stack for small systems

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 6 May 2014 22:00:47 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:	Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: A reduced Linux network stack for small systems

> not quite. I'm saying: no extra optimizations, no GCC changes.
> Compile kernel as-is. Most functions have a stub for mcount() already.
> Use it to track whether kernel function was called or not.
> Collect this data in userspace (as perf already does), add few
> more functions that had 'notrace' attribute on them, and feed this into
> special linker that unpacks existing vmlinux, throws away cold functions,
> relocates the rest and here you have tiny vmlinux without recompilation.

That's very difficult for networking code. How would you know you 
exercised all the corner cases in the TCP stack? And you wouldn't
want a remotely exploitable system because some important error
handler is missing.

I agree it may work for some other subsystems.

-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/