[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200907121928.28887.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 19:28:27 +0930
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Siarhei Liakh <sliakh.lkml@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@....de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-cris-kernel@...s.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] RO/NX protection for loadable kernel modules
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 05:15:24 pm Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:
> > (I like the idea of trying kmalloc and falling back, simply because
> > it reduces TLB pressure, but that's probably best done after
> > unification).
>
> or using a non-power-of-two get_free_pages() thing...
>
> some architectures will need to know that memory needs to be executable
> at allocation time so that it can be put in an executable address range
> etc...
Yes, maybe that's better than kmalloc. On my laptop I have 105 modules
loaded, with 3778464 total length: I'm wasting 206944 bytes on unused tails of
pages. But that's only 0.06% of my memory.
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists