Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:39:19 -0600 (CST)
From: Christoph Lameter <>
To: Laura Abbott <>
cc: Kees Cook <>, Pekka Enberg <>, 
    David Rientjes <>, Joonsoo Kim <>, 
    Andrew Morton <>, Linux-MM <>, 
    LKML <>, 
    "" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Sanitization of slabs based on grsecurity/PaX

n Wed, 20 Jan 2016, Laura Abbott wrote:

> The SLAB_DEBUG flags force everything to skip the CPU caches which is
> causing the slow down. I experimented with allowing the debugging to
> happen with CPU caches but I'm not convinced it's possible to do the
> checking on the fast path in a consistent manner without adding
> locking. Is it worth refactoring the debugging to be able to be used
> on cpu caches or should I take the approach here of having the clear
> be separate from free_debug_processing?

At least posioning would benefit from such work. I think both
sanitization and posoning should be done by the same logic. Remove
poisoning if necessary.

Note though that this security stuff should not have a significant impact
on the general case.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.