linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Static calls

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]

Date:   Tue, 11 Dec 2018 00:57:51 +0100
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Julia Cartwright <julia@...com>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Static calls

Hi!

> These patches are related to two similar patch sets from Ard and Steve:
> 
> - https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181005081333.15018-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org
> - https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181006015110.653946300@goodmis.org
> 
> The code is also heavily inspired by the jump label code, as some of the
> concepts are very similar.
> 
> There are three separate implementations, depending on what the arch
> supports:
> 
>   1) CONFIG_HAVE_STATIC_CALL_INLINE: patched call sites - requires
>      objtool and a small amount of arch code
>   
>   2) CONFIG_HAVE_STATIC_CALL_OUTLINE: patched trampolines - requires
>      a small amount of arch code
>   
>   3) If no arch support, fall back to regular function pointers

Well, it would be nice to mention what these patches do :-).

I guess they are expected to make things slightly faster? If so it
would be nice to mention benchmarks...

(There are even statistics later in the series, but I guess at least
short explanation should be in cover letter).

								Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)