linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/8] kasan: hardware tag-based mode for production use on arm64

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: <CACT4Y+a=twL5eKnpZE18g4j57+PEYMPC0Loyx_mepn4u+hJTxg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Oct 2020 07:20:05 +0200
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc:     Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Elena Petrova <lenaptr@...gle.com>,
        Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@....com>,
        Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Serban Constantinescu <serbanc@...gle.com>,
        Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/8] kasan: hardware tag-based mode for production use
 on arm64

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 2:23 PM Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 22:44, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > A question to KASAN maintainers: what would be the best way to support the
> > "off" mode? I see two potential approaches: add a check into each kasan
> > callback (easier to implement, but we still call kasan callbacks, even
> > though they immediately return), or add inline header wrappers that do the
> > same.
>
> This is tricky, because we don't know how bad the performance will be
> if we keep them as calls. We'd have to understand the performance
> impact of keeping them as calls, and if the performance impact is
> acceptable or not.
>
> Without understanding the performance impact, the only viable option I
> see is to add __always_inline kasan_foo() wrappers, which use the
> static branch to guard calls to __kasan_foo().

This sounds reasonable to me.