linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] make *_gate_vma accept mm_struct instead of task

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: <20110310165414.GA6431@fibrous.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:54:14 -0500
From:	Stephen Wilson <wilsons@...rt.ca>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	x86@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	linux390@...ibm.com, Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] make *_gate_vma accept mm_struct instead of
	task_struct II


On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 08:38:09AM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 08:00:32AM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 07:31:56PM -0500, Stephen Wilson wrote:
> > > The only architecture this change impacts in any significant way is x86_64.
> > > The principle change on that architecture is to mirror TIF_IA32 via
> > > a new flag in mm_context_t. 
> > 
> > The problem is -- you're adding a likely cache miss on mm_struct for
> > every 32bit compat syscall now, even if they don't need mm_struct
> > currently (and a lot of them do not) Unless there's a very good
> > justification to make up for this performance issue elsewhere
> > (including numbers) this seems like a bad idea.
> 
> Hmm I see you're only setting it on exec time actually on rereading
> the patches. I thought you were changing TS_COMPAT which is in
> the syscall path.
> 
> Never mind.  I have no problems with doing such a change on exec
> time.

OK.  Great!  Does this mean I have your ACK'ed by or reviewed by?


Thanks for taking a look!

-- 
steve

--
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/