[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyLcyvTqMvGKOQEW_v3UuMLsdcTpO_2B1sCW8aUTz67zw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 11:16:10 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: vmalloced stacks on x86_64?
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>
> On brief inspection, grsecurity isn't actually vmallocing the stack.
> It seems to be allocating it the normal way and then vmapping it.
> That allows it to modify sg_set_buf to work on stack addresses (sigh).
Perhaps more importantly, the vmalloc space is a limited resource (at
least on 32-bit), and using vmap probably results in less
fragmentation.
I don't think either is really even an option on 32-bit due to the
limited address space. On 64-bit, maybe a virtually remapped stack
would be ok.
Linus
--
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