[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8c4e556dd44043aaa2d1ad7e28cec12a@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 16:37:54 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Willy Tarreau' <w@....eu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Alexei Starovoitov" <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v2 6/6] x86/entry/pti: don't switch PGD on when
pti_disable is set
From: Willy Tarreau
> Sent: 11 January 2018 22:07
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:28:18PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > The traditional fast system call to test is getppid().
> >
> > write() goes through a lot more code.
>
> Just tried getppid() now, it's relatively similar (slightly slower than
> write(-1) though, maybe that one aborts very early) :
>
> PTI=on : 920ms for 3 million calls
> PTI=off (prctl) : 230ms for 3 million calls
> PTI=off (boot) : 215ms for 3 million calls
>
> The small difference between the last two very likely comes from the few
> instructions avoided thanks to the alternatives when pti=off is used at
> boot.
>
> So yes here it's trivial to tell if it's on or off :-)
A system call with a larger kernel memory footprint, and user
code that touches more pages, might show an even bigger difference
between PTI=on and PTI=off.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists