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, 6 Feb 2019 00:35:50 +0000
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>
To:     Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
        "daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org" <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        "dave.hansen@...el.com" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "kristen@...ux.intel.com" <kristen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Initial support for allocating BPF JITs in
 vmalloc for x86

On 2/5/19 2:50 PM, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> This introduces a new capability for BPF program JIT's to be located in vmalloc
> space on x86_64. This can serve as a backup area for CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON in
> case an unprivileged app uses all of the module space allowed by bpf_jit_limit.
> 
> In order to allow for calls from the increased distance of vmalloc from
> kernel/module space, relative calls are emitted as full indirect calls if the
> maximum relative call distance is exceeded. So the resulting performance of call
> BPF instructions in this case is similar to the BPF interpreter.

If I read this correctly the patches introduce retpoline overhead
to direct function call because JITed progs are more than 32-bit apart
and they're far away only because of dubious security concern ?
Nack.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists