[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJcbSZEouZ2v+q_i-3Xiba2FNT18ipKwF09838vvfSCwEi7e4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:11:12 -0700
From: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, René Nyffenegger <mail@...enyffenegger.ch>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>, Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@...tuozzo.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, Stanislav Kinsburskiy <skinsbursky@...tuozzo.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
He Chen <he.chen@...ux.intel.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@....com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>, "David A . Long" <dave.long@...aro.org>,
Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] x86/syscalls: Specific usage of verify_pre_usermode_state
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 1:49 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 03/22/17 13:41, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>>>> with the change below for additional feedback.
>>>
>>> Can you specify what that means?
>>
>> If I set inline by default, the compiler chose not to inline it on
>> x86. If I force inline the size impact was actually bigger (without
>> the architecture specific code).
>>
>
> That's utterly bizarre. Something strange is going on there. I suspect
> the right thing to do is to out-of-line the error case only, but even
> that seems strange. It should be something like four instructions inline.
>
The compiler seemed to often inline other functions called by the
syscall handlers. I assume the growth was due to changes in code
optimization because the function is much larger at the end.
>>>
>>> On x86, where there is only one caller of this, it really seems like it
>>> ought to reduce the overhead to almost zero (since it most likely is
>>> hidden in the pipeline.)
>>>
>>> I would like to suggest defining it inline if
>>> CONFIG_ARCH_NO_SYSCALL_VERIFY_PRE_USERMODE_STATE is set; I really don't
>>> care about an architecture which doesn't have it.
>>
>> But if there is only one caller, does the compiler is not suppose to
>> inline the function based on options?
>
> If it is marked static in the same file, yes, but you have it in a
> different file from what I can tell.
If we do global optimization, it should. Having it as a static inline
make it easier on all types of builds.
>
>> The assembly will call it too, so I would need an inline and a
>> non-inline based on the caller.
>
> Where? I don't see that anywhere, at least for x86.
After the latest changes on x86, yes. On arm/arm64, we call it with
the CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION config.
>
> -hpa
>
--
Thomas
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.
