linux-kernel - Re: [patch 14/48] KVM: Reduce kvm stack usage in kvm_arch_vm

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: <20090906054749.GB1431@ucw.cz>
Date:	Sun, 6 Sep 2009 07:47:49 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
	stable-review@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 14/48] KVM: Reduce kvm stack usage in
	kvm_arch_vm_ioctl()

On Fri 2009-09-04 13:07:26, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> 2.6.27-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
> 
> ------------------
> From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> (cherry picked from commit f0d662759a2465babdba1160749c446648c9d159)
> 
> On my machine with gcc 3.4, kvm uses ~2k of stack in a few
> select functions.  This is mostly because gcc fails to
> notice that the different case: statements could have their
> stack usage combined.  It overflows very nicely if interrupts
> happen during one of these large uses.
> 
> This patch uses two methods for reducing stack usage.
> 1. dynamically allocate large objects instead of putting
>    on the stack.
> 2. Use a union{} member for all of the case variables. This
>    tricks gcc into combining them all into a single stack
>    allocation. (There's also a comment on this)

Are the 'reduce stack usage' patches suitable for stable? The rules
said that fix must be for 'serious problem', not 'theoretical
issue'...
 

> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |   72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -1630,6 +1630,15 @@ long kvm_arch_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp
>  	struct kvm *kvm = filp->private_data;
>  	void __user *argp = (void __user *)arg;
>  	int r = -EINVAL;
> +	/*
> +	 * This union makes it completely explicit to gcc-3.x
> +	 * that these two variables' stack usage should be
> +	 * combined, not added together.
> +	 */
> +	union {
> +		struct kvm_pit_state ps;
> +		struct kvm_memory_alias alias;
> +	} u;
>  
>  	switch (ioctl) {
>  	case KVM_SET_TSS_ADDR:

...plus this is really ugly hack. Just declare the variable inside the
case block that needs it?
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/