[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 15:44:51 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
kristen Accardi <kristen.c.accardi@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] vmalloc: Add __vmalloc_node_try_addr function
On 06/20/2018 03:35 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 3:16 PM, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>> On 06/20/2018 03:09 PM, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
>>> +void *__vmalloc_node_try_addr(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size,
>>> + gfp_t gfp_mask, pgprot_t prot, unsigned long vm_flags,
>>> + int node, const void *caller)
>>> +{
>>
>> so this isn't optional, eh? You are going to force it on people because?
>
> RANDOMIZE_BASE isn't optional either. :) This improves the module
> address entropy with (what seems to be) no down-side, so yeah, I think
> it should be non-optional. :)
In what kernel tree is RANDOMIZE_BASE not optional?
x86:
config RANDOMIZE_BASE
bool "Randomize the address of the kernel image (KASLR)"
depends on RELOCATABLE
default y
mips:
config RANDOMIZE_BASE
bool "Randomize the address of the kernel image"
depends on RELOCATABLE
arm64:
config RANDOMIZE_BASE
bool "Randomize the address of the kernel image"
select ARM64_MODULE_PLTS if MODULES
select RELOCATABLE
thanks,
--
~Randy
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.
