[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131119083053.GB1243@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:30:53 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
mingo@...hat.com, n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com, willy@...ux.intel.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 3/3] x86, mm: get ASLR work for hugetlb mappings
* akpm@...ux-foundation.org <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Subject: x86, mm: get ASLR work for hugetlb mappings
>
> Matthew noticed that hugetlb doesn't participate in ASLR on x86-64. The
> reason is genereic hugetlb_get_unmapped_area() which is used on x86-64.
> It doesn't support randomization and use bottom-up unmapped area lookup,
> instead of usual top-down on x86-64.
>
> x86 has arch-specific hugetlb_get_unmapped_area(), but it's used only on
> x86-32.
>
> Let's use arch-specific hugetlb_get_unmapped_area() on x86-64 too. It
> fixes the issue and make hugetlb use top-down unmapped area lookup.
So the title and the changelog has typos (I counted three), which
makes me wonder how well this was tested.
To show/document the testing effort a before/after /proc/PID/maps
output showing hugetlb vma addresses would be nice, showing that ASLR
didn't work before and that it works adequately after the patch.
A word about the range and granularity of randomization in the typical
case would be nice as well.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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