linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 00/27] Kernel Address Space Isolation

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: <b1b7f85f-dac3-80a3-c05c-160f58716ce8@oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Jul 2019 14:47:23 +0200
From:   Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     pbonzini@...hat.com, rkrcmar@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, luto@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        konrad.wilk@...cle.com, jan.setjeeilers@...cle.com,
        liran.alon@...cle.com, jwadams@...gle.com, graf@...zon.de,
        rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 00/27] Kernel Address Space Isolation


On 7/12/19 2:36 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 02:17:20PM +0200, Alexandre Chartre wrote:
>> On 7/12/19 1:44 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
>>> AFAIK3 this wants/needs to be combined with core-scheduling to be
>>> useful, but not a single mention of that is anywhere.
>>
>> No. This is actually an alternative to core-scheduling. Eventually, ASI
>> will kick all sibling hyperthreads when exiting isolation and it needs to
>> run with the full kernel page-table (note that's currently not in these
>> patches).
>>
>> So ASI can be seen as an optimization to disabling hyperthreading: instead
>> of just disabling hyperthreading you run with ASI, and when ASI can't preserve
>> isolation you will basically run with a single thread.
> 
> You can't do that without much of the scheduler changes present in the
> core-scheduling patches.
> 

We hope we can do that without the whole core-scheduling mechanism. The idea
is to send an IPI to all sibling hyperthreads. This IPI will interrupt these
sibling hyperthreads and have them wait for a condition that will allow them
to resume execution (for example when re-entering isolation). We are
investigating this in parallel to ASI.

alex.