[lkml]   [2011]   [May]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 0/6] Micro-optimize vclock_gettime
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Andrew Lutomirski <> writes:
> > Longer term, it would be nice to mark the vsyscall page NX. That
> > involves a few things:
> Why NX? What would make sense is to call the VDSO from it.
> The problem is that the vDSO is randomized and there's no good memory
> location to store the pointer to it.
> The real reason for all this dance is to have some less non randomized
> code around. What I implemented back then was instead code to patch out
> the SYSCALL in there if not needed to lower the attack surface (not sure
> if that still works though, but that was the idea). For most cases
> (TSC/HPET read) it's not needed.
> Checking: someone removed the code meanwhile.

For a damned good reason.

> > And we won't have a
> > syscall instruction sitting at a predictable address.
> The easy way to fix this is to just re-add the patching.

If you can address _all_ reasons why it was removed then we might
revisit that issue, but that's going to be an interesting patch.



 \ /
  Last update: 2011-05-16 23:55    [W:0.053 / U:54.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site