linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/17] khwasan: kernel hardware assisted address sanitizer

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:   Mon, 2 Jul 2018 12:21:12 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>
Cc:     Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Dave Martin <dave.martin@....com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Paul Lawrence <paullawrence@...gle.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
        Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@....com>,
        Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@....com>,
        Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@....com>,
        Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@....com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Mark Brand <markbrand@...gle.com>,
        Chintan Pandya <cpandya@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/17] khwasan: kernel hardware assisted address
 sanitizer

On Mon, 2 Jul 2018 12:16:42 -0700 Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 14:45:08 +0200 Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >> What kind of memory consumption testing would you like to see?
> >> >
> >> > Well, 100kb or so is a teeny amount on virtually any machine.  I'm
> >> > assuming the savings are (much) more significant once the machine gets
> >> > loaded up and doing work?
> >>
> >> So with clean kernel after boot we get 40 kb memory usage. With KASAN
> >> it is ~120 kb, which is 200% overhead. With KHWASAN it's 50 kb, which
> >> is 25% overhead. This should approximately scale to any amounts of
> >> used slab memory. For example with 100 mb memory usage we would get
> >> +200 mb for KASAN and +25 mb with KHWASAN. (And KASAN also requires
> >> quarantine for better use-after-free detection). I can explicitly
> >> mention the overhead in %s in the changelog.
> >>
> >> If you think it makes sense, I can also make separate measurements
> >> with some workload. What kind of workload should I use?
> >
> > Whatever workload people were running when they encountered problems
> > with KASAN memory consumption ;)
> >
> > I dunno, something simple.  `find / > /dev/null'?
> >
>
> Looking at a live Android device under load, slab (according to
> /proc/meminfo) + kernel stack take 8-10% available RAM (~350MB).
> Kasan's overhead of 2x - 3x on top of it is not insignificant.
> 

(top-posting repaired.  Please don't)

For a debugging, not-for-production-use feature, that overhead sounds
quite acceptable to me.  What problems is it known to cause?