linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/12] x86/dumpstack: Pin the target stack in save_stack_trace

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 15 Sep 2016 11:27:29 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/12] x86/dumpstack: Pin the target stack in
 save_stack_trace_tsk()


* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> It absolutely is - compared to the vmalloc costs. Andy has quite noticeable 
> slowdowns without the stack reuse - and the stack reuse requires the delayed 
> freeing. With the stack reuse, fork/exit actually sped up.

Ok, great, that's convincing!

I'm still applying it two-phase and I'll wait for v2 of the second half of the 
series, to have the fix Josh alluded to.

Thanks,

	Ingo