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:   Wed, 29 Jul 2020 12:55:51 -0500
From:   "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" 
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        "linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] [RFC] Implement Trampoline File Descriptor



On 7/29/20 3:36 AM, David Laight wrote:
> From: Madhavan T. Venkataraman
>> Sent: 28 July 2020 19:52
> ...
>> trampfd faults are instruction faults that go through a different code path than
>> the one that calls handle_mm_fault(). Perhaps, it is the handle_mm_fault() that
>> is time consuming. Could you clarify?
> Given that the expectation is a few instructions in userspace
> (eg to pick up the original arguments for a nested call)
> the (probable) thousands of clocks taken by entering the
> kernel (especially with page table separation) is a massive
> delta.
>
> If entering the kernel were cheap no one would have added
> the DSO functions for getting the time of day.

I hear you. BTW, I did not say that the overhead was trivial.
I only said that in most cases, applications may not mind that
extra overhead.

However, since multiple people have raised that as an issue,
I will address it. I mentioned before that the kernel can actually
supply the code page that sets the context and jumps to
a PC and map it so the performance issue can be addressed.
I was planning to do that as a future enhancement.

If there is a consensus that I must address it immediately, I
could do that.

I will continue this discussion in my reply to Andy's email. Let
us pick it up from there.

Thanks.

Madhavan
>
> 	David
>
> -
> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ