From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Nadia Yvette Chambers <nyc@holomorphy.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, mm: get ASLR work for hugetlb mappings
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:21:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <526697F5.7040800@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1382449940-24357-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
On 10/22/2013 06:52 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> Matthew noticed that hugetlb doesn't participate in ASLR on x86-64.
> The reason is genereic hugetlb_get_unmapped_area() which is used on
> x86-64. It doesn't support randomization and use bottom-up unmapped area
> lookup, instead of usual top-down on x86-64.
I have to wonder if this was on purpose in order to keep the large and
small mappings separate. We don't *have* to keep them separate this, of
course, but it makes me wonder.
> x86 has arch-specific hugetlb_get_unmapped_area(), but it's used only on
> x86-32.
>
> Let's use arch-specific hugetlb_get_unmapped_area() on x86-64 too.
> It fixes the issue and make hugetlb use top-down unmapped area lookup.
Shouldn't we fix the generic code instead of further specializing the
x86 stuff?
In any case, you probably also want to run this through: the
libhugetlbfs tests:
http://sourceforge.net/p/libhugetlbfs/code/ci/master/tree/tests/
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Nadia Yvette Chambers <nyc@holomorphy.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, mm: get ASLR work for hugetlb mappings
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:21:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <526697F5.7040800@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1382449940-24357-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
On 10/22/2013 06:52 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> Matthew noticed that hugetlb doesn't participate in ASLR on x86-64.
> The reason is genereic hugetlb_get_unmapped_area() which is used on
> x86-64. It doesn't support randomization and use bottom-up unmapped area
> lookup, instead of usual top-down on x86-64.
I have to wonder if this was on purpose in order to keep the large and
small mappings separate. We don't *have* to keep them separate this, of
course, but it makes me wonder.
> x86 has arch-specific hugetlb_get_unmapped_area(), but it's used only on
> x86-32.
>
> Let's use arch-specific hugetlb_get_unmapped_area() on x86-64 too.
> It fixes the issue and make hugetlb use top-down unmapped area lookup.
Shouldn't we fix the generic code instead of further specializing the
x86 stuff?
In any case, you probably also want to run this through: the
libhugetlbfs tests:
http://sourceforge.net/p/libhugetlbfs/code/ci/master/tree/tests/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-22 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-22 13:52 [PATCH] x86, mm: get ASLR work for hugetlb mappings Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-22 13:52 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-22 15:21 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2013-10-22 15:21 ` Dave Hansen
2013-10-22 17:52 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-22 17:52 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-11-04 10:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-11-04 10:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-11-04 21:09 ` Andrew Morton
2013-11-04 21:09 ` Andrew Morton
2013-11-11 13:45 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-11-11 13:45 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=526697F5.7040800@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=nyc@holomorphy.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=willy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.