[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrV-vk-49HkOXi6EW0zxzDrCj2DM4N2i33AuX-vGNb0SHg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 19:36:40 -0800
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Daniel Gruss <daniel.gruss@...k.tugraz.at>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
michael.schwarz@...k.tugraz.at, moritz.lipp@...k.tugraz.at,
richard.fellner@...dent.tugraz.at
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] x86/mm/kaiser: Add a banner
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> So we can more easily see if the shiny got enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> ---
> arch/x86/mm/kaiser.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/kaiser.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/kaiser.c
> @@ -425,6 +425,8 @@ void __init kaiser_init(void)
> if (!kaiser_enabled)
> return;
>
> + printk("All your KAISER are belong to us\n");
> +
All your incomprehensible academic names are belong to us.
On a serious note, can we please banish the name KAISER from all the
user-facing bits? No one should be setting a boot option that has a
name based on an academic project called "Kernel Address Isolation to
have Side-channels Efficiently Removed". We're not efficiently
removing side channels. The side channels are still very much there.
Heck, the series as currently presented doesn't even rescue kASLR. It
could*, if we were to finish the work that I mostly started and
completely banish all the normal kernel mappings from the shadow**
tables. We're rather inefficiently (and partially!) mitigating the
fact that certain CPU designers have had their heads up their
collective arses for *years* and have failed to pay attention to
numerous academic papers documenting that fact.
Let's call the user facing bits "separate user pagetables". If we
want to make it conditioned on a future cpu cap called
X86_BUG_REALLY_DUMB_SIDE_CHANNELS, great, assuming a better CPU ever
shows up. But please let's not make users look up WTF "KAISER" means.
* No one ever documented the %*!& side channels AFAIK, so everything
we're talking about here is mostly speculation.
** The word "shadow" needs to die, too. I know what shadow page
tables are, and they have *nothing* to do with KAISER.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists