Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1612393
| From | Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: move FPU state into separate cache |
| Date | 2017-03-29 23:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tqttV-4o9-41@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tqsHv-3Oj-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tqt0S-4cP-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <tqtaz-4hp-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <tqttU-4o9-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: >> >> They're adjacent already, which poses a problem for the struct layout >> randomization plugin, since adjacency may no longer be true (after >> layout randomization). T > > What? > > The layout randomization can't change anything, if you just make the > adjacency be done explicitly instead of by having the thing be a fixed > member. > > The trivial model might be to just declare the fpu part as an unsized > array at the end: > > /* Floating point and extended processor state */ > struct fpu fpu[]; > > because there is no way in hell that any randomization code can move > those kinds of unsized arrays around. If it does, the gcc plugin is > such unbelievable garbage that it would be insane to depend on such > shit in the first place. > Randomization also needs to leave thread_info at the beginning. Can it do that?
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