[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLNB5dmA0o=n_nn=4NRu3LjuNf5PGRopATuRiq0aJ1ECA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 10:13:19 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Li Kun <hw.likun@...wei.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...oraproject.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH untested] arm64: kernel: implement fast refcount checking
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Ard Biesheuvel
<ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I had a stab at porting the fast refcount checks to arm64. It is slightly
> less straight-forward than x86 given that we need to support both LSE and
> LL/SC, and fallback to the latter if running a kernel built with support
> for the former on hardware that does not support it.
>
> It is build tested with and without LSE support, and boots fine on non-LSE
> hardware in both cases.
Ah! Very cool. Hopefully you and Li can compare notes; I think they've
been working on an implementation too.
> Suggestions welcome as to how to test and/or benchmark this,
I'll post a patch for LKDTM that I've been using. It's more
comprehensive than the existing ATOMIC checks (which predated the
refcount-only protection).
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
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.
