linux-kernel - Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC, PATCH] x86_64: KAISER

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]

Message-ID: <6013bf3f-c3bd-3836-e5e2-ea89cc2e556a@nod.at>
Date:   Mon, 8 May 2017 00:02:41 +0200
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:     Daniel Gruss <daniel.gruss@...k.tugraz.at>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" 
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        "clementine.maurice@...k.tugraz.at" 
        <clementine.maurice@...k.tugraz.at>,
        "moritz.lipp@...k.tugraz.at" <moritz.lipp@...k.tugraz.at>,
        Michael Schwarz <michael.schwarz@...k.tugraz.at>,
        Richard Fellner <richard.fellner@...dent.tugraz.at>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "anders.fogh@...ta-adan.de" <anders.fogh@...ta-adan.de>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC, PATCH] x86_64: KAISER - do not map
 kernel in user mode

Daniel,

Am 07.05.2017 um 23:45 schrieb Daniel Gruss:
>> Just did a quick test on my main KVM host, a 8 core Intel(R) Xeon(R)
>> CPU E3-1240 V2.
>> KVM guests are 4.10 w/o CONFIG_KAISER and kvmconfig without CONFIG_PARAVIRT.
>> Building a defconfig kernel within that guests is about 10% slower
>> when CONFIG_KAISER
>> is enabled.
> 
> Thank you for testing it! :)
> 
>> Is this expected?
> 
> It sounds plausible. First, I would expect any form of virtualization to increase the overhead. Second, for the processor (Ivy Bridge), I would have expected even higher
> performance overheads. KAISER utilizes very recent performance improvements in Intel processors...

Ahh, *very* recent is the keyword then. ;)
I was a bit confused since in your paper the overhead is less than 1%.

What platforms did you test?
i.e. how does it perform on recent AMD systems?

Thanks,
//richard