[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201002081215.31527.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 12:15:31 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: Siarhei Liakh <sliakh.lkml@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.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>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] RO/NX protection for loadable kernel modules
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 09:35:39 am Andi Kleen wrote:
> Siarhei Liakh <sliakh.lkml@...il.com> writes:
>
> > This patch is a logical extension of the protection provided by
> > CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA to LKMs. The protection is provided by splitting
> > module_core and module_init into three logical parts each and setting
> > appropriate page access permissions for each individual section:
>
> My current kernel has 52 modules loaded, most of them very small.
> Assuming the additional alignment of the data section cost two more
> pages on average (I think that's a good assumption), that's roughly
> 424KB of additional memory, plus associated runtime costs in increased
> TLB usage.
>
> What would I get for that if I applied the patch and enabled the option?
Strict RO/NX protection. But without the option enabled, the patch gives
best-effort protection, which is nice (for no additional space).
Cheers,
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