|
Message-Id: <20160524222901.9c60f81a0e3a48df0654d5e6@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 22:29:01 +0200 From: Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>, Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>, Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>, linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, bart.vanassche@...disk.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] Add the extra_latent_entropy kernel parameter On Tue, 24 May 2016 10:09:16 -0700 Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com> wrote: > > @@ -1235,6 +1236,15 @@ static void __free_pages_ok(struct page *page, unsigned int order) > > } > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_LATENT_ENTROPY > > +bool __meminitdata extra_latent_entropy; > > + > > +static int __init setup_extra_latent_entropy(char *str) > > +{ > > + extra_latent_entropy = true; > > + return 0; > > +} > > +early_param("extra_latent_entropy", setup_extra_latent_entropy); > > + > > volatile u64 latent_entropy __latent_entropy; > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(latent_entropy); > > #endif > > @@ -1254,6 +1264,19 @@ static void __init __free_pages_boot_core(struct page *page, unsigned int order) > > __ClearPageReserved(p); > > set_page_count(p, 0); > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_LATENT_ENTROPY > > + if (extra_latent_entropy && !PageHighMem(page) && page_to_pfn(page) < 0x100000) { > > + u64 hash = 0; > > + size_t index, end = PAGE_SIZE * nr_pages / sizeof hash; > > + const u64 *data = lowmem_page_address(page); > > + > > + for (index = 0; index < end; index++) > > + hash ^= hash + data[index]; > > + latent_entropy ^= hash; > > + add_device_randomness((const void *)&latent_entropy, sizeof(latent_entropy)); > > + } > > +#endif > > + > > We try to minimize #ifdefs in the .c code, so in this case, I think I > would define "extra_latent_entropy" during an #else above so this "if" > can be culled by the compiler automatically: > > #else > # define extra_latent_entropy false > #endif > > Others may have better suggestions to avoid the second #ifdef, but > this seems the cleanest way to me to tie this to the earlier #ifdef. Hi, I think the best way would be if I removed all #ifdefs because this is useful without the latent_entropy plugin. I don't know wether the default value of extra_latent_entropy should be true or false. I'll do some performance measurements. -- Emese
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.