Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 12:06:57 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: Add SLUB free list pointer obfuscation On Fri, 7 Jul 2017, Kees Cook wrote: > If we also added a >0 offset, that would make things even less > deterministic. Though I wonder if it would make the performance impact > higher. The XOR patch right now is very light. There would be barely any performance impact if you keep the offset within a cacheline since most objects start on a cacheline boundary. The processor has to fetch the cacheline anyways.
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.