linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHSET x86/master] add stack protector support for x86

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]

Message-ID: <4990DA3B.7060109@kernel.org>
Date:	Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:36:59 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, hpa@...or.com, jeremy@...p.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET x86/master] add stack protector support for x86_32

Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> I had a patch a while back that would convert those function to take a
>> pointer to pt_regs instead of assuming that the struct was passed by
>> value. [...]
> 
> Yes, that's the right solution. Getting a new call convention recognized
> is a 3 years timeframe project for a whole team of hackers. Adding a
> pointer is a 30 minutes project for one good kernel hacker ;)
> 
>> [...]  I'll take a stab at reworking it on top of this series.
> 
> Cool!

We do add some overhead that way and Linus was against it several
years ago, so the addition of asmlinkage_protect() macros.  Given that
the calling convention thing never happened through all the years and
modern machines probably wouldn't care much one way or the other, it
could just be about time to convert to pointer passing.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/