linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC V2 3/5] jump_label: if a key has already been initialized, don't nop it out

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]

Date:	Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:05:51 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>,
	Jan Glauber <jang@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Xen Devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
	peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V2 3/5] jump_label: if a key has already been
 initialized, don't nop it out

On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 13:53 -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 09:30:01AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 10/04/2011 07:10 AM, Jason Baron wrote:
> > > 
> > > 1) The jmp +0, is a 'safe' no-op that I know is going to initially
> > > boot for all x86. I'm not sure if there is a 5-byte nop that works on
> > > all x86 variants - but by using jmp +0, we make it much easier to debug
> > > cases where we may be using broken no-ops.
> > > 
> > 
> > There are *plenty*.  jmp+0 is about as pessimal as you can get.
> > 
> > The current recommendation when you don't know the CPU you're running at is:
> > 
> > 	3E 8D 74 26 00	(GENERIC_NOP5_ATOMIC)
> > 
> > ... on 32 bits and ...
> > 
> > 	0F 1F 44 00 00	(P6_NOP5_ATOMIC)
> > 
> > ... on 64 bits.
> > 
> > 	-hpa
> > 
> 
> We're currently patching the code at run-time (boot and module load
> time), with the 'ideal' no-op anyway, so the initial no-op doesn't
> really matter much (other than to save patching if the initial and ideal
> match).

Out of correctness, we should still update this to use the proper
"default" nops, as mcount already does.

-- 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/