linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] x86/pti/64: Remove the SYSCALL64 entry trampoline

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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1809080827240.1402@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sat, 8 Sep 2018 08:33:27 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:     Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] x86/pti/64: Remove the SYSCALL64 entry
 trampoline

On Fri, 7 Sep 2018, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 12:54 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > >  - We execute from an extra page and read from another extra page
> > > during the syscall.  (The latter is because we need to use a relative
> > > addressing mode to find sp1 -- it's the same *cacheline* we'd use
> > > anyway, but we're accessing it using an alias, so it's an extra TLB
> > > entry.)
> >
> > Ok, but is this really an issue with PTI?
> 
> I'd expect it to be *more* of an issue with PTI, since you're already
> wasting TLB entries due to the whole "two different page tables".
> 
> Sure, address space ID's save you from reloading them all the time,
> but don't help with capacity.
> 
> But yeah, in the sense of "with PTI, all kernel entries are slow
> anyway, so none of this matters" is probably correct in a very real
> sense.

Unfortunately yes. As Andy pointed out the alternative approach would trade
an avoided pipeline stall with an extra TLB.

> That said, the real reason I like Andy's patch series is that I think
> it's simpler than the alternatives (including the current setup). No
> subtle mappings, no nothing. It removes a lot more lines than it adds,
> and half the lines that it *does* add are comments.

I agree and in fact I had the series already queued for merging, I just
wanted to get the full picture and add some of that information to the
changelog.

> Virtual mapping tricks may be cool, but in the end, not having to use
> them is better still, I think.

Sure, unless they provide a real value. The maybe smaller leak of address
information is probably not worth it.

Thanks,

	tglx