linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt

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:	Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:32:05 +0000
From:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:	Zhi-zhou <zhizhou.zh@...il.com>
Cc:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, robin.murphy@....com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 10:30:09AM +0800, Zhi-zhou wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Catalin Marinas
> <catalin.marinas@....com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 07:48:35PM +0800, Zhi-zhou Zhang wrote:
> > > From: zhizhou <zhizhou.zh@...il.com>
> > >
> > > This patch is based on the implementation of arm. The generic
> > > current_pt_regs is implemented with current->stack. It need to access
> > > memory that would be too expensive.
> >
> > Do you have any performance numbers?
> 
> I'm using QEMU, so no. Actually this macro isn't heavily used. I just
> think using the generic
> implementation is not very nice. It get task_struct from sp_el0, then
> get stack(which is
> equal to sp_el0) from task_struct. There are two unnecessary memory accesses.

I'd much rather use the generic implementation unless there's a compelling
reason not to. "I think it's not very nice" doesn't really cut it for me!

Will