linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/slub: disable slab merging in the default configuration

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: <202306281358.E6E6C2759@keescook>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2023 13:59:34 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Julian Pidancet <julian.pidancet@...cle.com>
Cc:     Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/slub: disable slab merging in the default
 configuration

On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 03:21:31PM +0200, Julian Pidancet wrote:
> Make CONFIG_SLAB_MERGE_DEFAULT default to n unless CONFIG_SLUB_TINY is
> enabled. Benefits of slab merging is limited on systems that are not
> memory constrained: the overhead is negligible and evidence of its
> effect on cache hotness is hard to come by.
> 
> On the other hand, distinguishing allocations into different slabs will
> make attacks that rely on "heap spraying" more difficult to carry out
> with success.
> 
> Take sides with security in the default kernel configuration over
> questionnable performance benefits/memory efficiency.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julian Pidancet <julian.pidancet@...cle.com>
> ---
> In an attempt to assess the performance impact of disabling slab
> merging, a timed linux kernel compilation test has been conducted first
> using slab_merge, then using slab_nomerge. Both tests started in an
> identical state.  Commodity hardware was used: a laptop with an AMD Ryzen
> 5 3500U CPU, and 16GiB of RAM. The kernel source files were placed on
> an XFS partition because of the extensive use of slab caches in XFS.
> 
> The results are as follows:
> 
>       | slab_merge       | slab_nomerge     |
> ------+------------------+------------------|
> Time  | 489.074 ± 10.334 | 489.975 ± 10.350 |
> Min   |          459.688 |          460.554 |
> Max   |          493.126 |          494.282 |
> 
> The benchmark favors the configuration where merging is disabled, but the
> difference is only ~0.18%, well under statistical significance.

As mentioned, please include these kinds of perf notes in the commit
log; it's useful to see later. :)

Regardless, yes, please. I have been running slab_nomerge on all my
systems for years and years now.

With the typo fixed and commit log updated, please consider this:

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook