Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1612360
| From | Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache |
| Date | 2017-03-29 23:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tqtaz-4hp-39@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tqsHv-3Oj-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tqt0S-4cP-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:45 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > On 03/29/17 13:39, Kees Cook wrote: >> This removes ARCH_WANTS_DYNAMIC_TASK_STRUCT from x86, leaving only s390 >> still defining this config. >> >> In order to support future structure layout randomization of the >> task_struct, none of the structure fields are allowed to have a specific >> position or dynamic size. To enable randomization of task_struct on >> x86, the FPU state must be moved to its own dynamically sized cache, >> and dereferenced from the task_struct. >> >> This change is nearly identical to what was done in grsecurity to support >> structure layout randomization. Hopefully I found all the needed changes. >> This passes allyesconfig, and boot tests. > > Is this really what we want to happen? It seems much more sane to > simply make them adjacent; they don't need to be part of the same > structure (in practice, there are three objects: thread_info, > task_struct, and the FPU state.) They're adjacent already, which poses a problem for the struct layout randomization plugin, since adjacency may no longer be true (after layout randomization). This adjacency (or not) isn't really the problem: it's that FPU state size is only known at runtime. Another solution would be to have FPU state be a fixed size... -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-03-29 22:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2017-03-29 23:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-03-29 23:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-03-29 23:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-29 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2017-03-29 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-29 23:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache hpa@zytor.com - 2017-03-30 00:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-30 02:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-03-30 04:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-29 23:40 +0200
csiph-web