[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 45/51] x86: remove 64-byte gap at end of irq stack
On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 08:50:57AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 7:29 AM, Josh Poimboeuf <> wrote:
> >> There has been a 64-byte gap at the end of the irq stack for at least 12
> >> years. It predates git history, and I can't find any good reason for
> >> it. Remove it. What's the worst that could happen?
> >
> > I can't think of any reason this would matter.
> >
> > For that matter, do you have any idea why irq_stack_union is a union
> > or why we insist on sticking it at %gs:0? Sure, the *canary* needs to
> > live at a fixed offset (because GCC is daft, sigh), but I don't see
> > what that has to do with the rest of the IRQ stack.
> >
> > --Andy
> Because the IRQ stack requires page alignment so it was convenient to
> put it at the start of the per-cpu area. I don't think at the time I
> wrote this there was specific support for page-aligned objects in
> per-cpu memory. Since stacks grow down, it was tolerable to reserve a
> few bytes at the bottom for the canary.

Hm. Sounds like another good opportunity for a cleanup (though it's
well outside the scope of this patch set).

> What would be great is if we could leverage the new GCC plugin tools
> to reimplement stack protector in a manner that is more compatible
> with the kernel environment. It would make the stack canary a true
> per-cpu variable instead of the hard-coded TLS-based location it is
> now. That would make 64-bit be able to use normal delta per-cpu
> offsets instead of zero-based, and would allow 32-bit to always do
> lazy GS.
> --
> Brian Gerst


 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-17 09:56    [W:0.106 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site