[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPAsAGzYSi_mCy64rFH=o+m8eT-A9ffttsFO9Wx94=nsj+Q8Jg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2023 14:40:33 +0100
From: Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>
To: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: KASLR vs. KASAN on x86
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 10:41 AM Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 06:24:05PM +0100, Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com> wrote:
> > So the vmemmap_base and probably some part of vmalloc could easily end
> > up in KASAN shadow.
>
> Would it help to (conditionally) reduce vaddr_end to the beginning of
> KASAN shadow memory?
> (I'm not that familiar with KASAN, so IOW, would KASAN handle
> randomized: linear mapping (__PAGE_OFFSET), vmalloc (VMALLOC_START) and
> vmemmap (VMEMMAP_START) in that smaller range.)
>
Yes, with the vaddr_end = KASAN_SHADOW_START it should work,
kaslr_memory_enabled() can be removed in favor of just the kaslr_enabled()
> Thanks,
> Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists