[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1556290658.2833.28.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 07:57:38 -0700
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Adams <jwadams@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/7] x86/sci: add core implementation for system
call isolation
On Fri, 2019-04-26 at 07:46 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 4/25/19 2:45 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > After the isolated system call finishes, the mappings created
> > during its execution are cleared.
>
> Yikes. I guess that stops someone from calling write() a bunch of
> times on every filesystem using every block device driver and all the
> DM code to get a lot of code/data faulted in. But, it also means not
> even long-running processes will ever have a chance of behaving
> anything close to normally.
>
> Is this something you think can be rectified or is there something
> fundamental that would keep SCI page tables from being cached across
> different invocations of the same syscall?
There is some work being done to look at pre-populating the isolated
address space with the expected execution footprint of the system call,
yes. It lessens the ROP gadget protection slightly because you might
find a gadget in the pre-populated code, but it solves a lot of the
overhead problem.
James
Powered by blists - more mailing lists