Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:16:46 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <>
To: Andy Lutomirski <>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <>, "the arch/x86 maintainers" <>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>, 
	"" <>, Borislav Petkov <>, 
	Nadav Amit <>, Kees Cook <>, 
	Brian Gerst <>, 
	"" <>, Josh Poimboeuf <>, 
	Jann Horn <>, Heiko Carstens <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Virtually mapped stacks with guard pages (x86, core)

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
> So I'm leaning toward fewer cache entries per cpu, maybe just one.
> I'm all for making it a bit faster, but I think we should weigh that
> against increasing memory usage too much and thus scaring away the
> embedded folks.

I don't think the embedded folks will be scared by a per-cpu cache, if
it's just one or two entries.  And I really do think that even just
one or two entries will indeed catch a lot of the cases.

And yes, fork+execve() is too damn expensive in page table build-up
and tear-down. I'm not sure why bash doesn't do vfork+exec for when it
has to wait for the process anyway, but it doesn't seem to do that.


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.