Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:14:58 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: "'kpark3469@...il.com'" <kpark3469@...il.com>,
	"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
CC: "catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, "will.deacon@....com"
	<will.deacon@....com>, "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>, "panand@...hat.com"
	<panand@...hat.com>, "keun-o.park@...kmatter.ae" <keun-o.park@...kmatter.ae>,
	"psodagud@...eaurora.org" <psodagud@...eaurora.org>, "jpoimboe@...hat.com"
	<jpoimboe@...hat.com>, "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 3/3] x86: usercopy: reimplement
 arch_within_stack_frames with unwinder

From: kpark3469@...il.com
> Sent: 09 April 2018 12:59
>
> The old arch_within_stack_frames which used the frame pointer is
> now reimplemented to use frame pointer unwinder apis. So the main
> functionality is same as before.

How much slower does this make the code?
Following stack frames using %bp is reasonably quick.
I can't imagine some of the other unwinder APIs being any where
near that fast.
While fine for fault tracebacks, using them during usercopy
is likely to have measurable performance impact.

	David

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

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