linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] rseq: Add sched

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, 27 Sep 2023 08:58:16 -0700
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
To:     Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
Cc:     mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, David.Laight@...lab.com,
        alexander@...alicyn.com, andrealmeid@...lia.com,
        boqun.feng@...il.com, brauner@...nel.org, carlos@...hat.com,
        ckennelly@...gle.com, corbet@....net, dave@...olabs.net,
        dvhart@...radead.org, goldstein.w.n@...il.com, hpa@...or.com,
        libc-alpha@...rceware.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, longman@...hat.com, mingo@...hat.com,
        paulmck@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, pjt@...gle.com,
        posk@...k.io, rostedt@...dmis.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] rseq: Add sched_state field to struct rseq

On Tue, 26 Sept 2023 at 21:51, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> * Dmitry Vyukov:
>
> > In reality it's a bit more involved since the field is actually 8
> > bytes and only partially overlaps with rseq.cpu_id_start (it's an
> > 8-byte pointer with high 4 bytes overlap rseq.cpu_id_start):
> >
> > https://github.com/google/tcmalloc/blob/229908285e216cca8b844c1781bf16b838128d1b/tcmalloc/internal/percpu.h#L101-L165
>
> This does not compose with other rseq users, as noted in the sources:
>
>   // Note: this makes __rseq_abi.cpu_id_start unusable for its original purpose.
>
> For a core library such a malloc replacement, that is a very bad trap.

I agree. I wouldn't do this if there were other options. That's why I
am looking for official kernel support for this.
If we would have a separate 8 bytes that are overwritten with 0 when a
thread is descheduled, that would be perfect.