From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC v1] implement SL*B and stack usercopy runtime checks Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 12:37:55 -0700 Message-ID: <1309721875.18925.30.camel@Joe-Laptop> References: <20110703111028.GA2862@albatros> <20110703185709.GA7414@albatros> <20110703192442.GA9504@albatros> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110703192442.GA9504@albatros> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Vasiliy Kulikov Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2011-07-03 at 23:24 +0400, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote: > Btw, if the perfomance will be acceptable, what do you think about > logging/reacting on the spotted overflows? If you do, it might be useful to track the found location(s) and only emit the overflow log entry once as found. Maybe use __builtin_return_address(depth) for tracking. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.perches.com ([173.55.12.10]:3505 "EHLO mail.perches.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752697Ab1GCTh6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2011 15:37:58 -0400 Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC v1] implement SL*B and stack usercopy runtime checks From: Joe Perches In-Reply-To: <20110703192442.GA9504@albatros> References: <20110703111028.GA2862@albatros> <20110703185709.GA7414@albatros> <20110703192442.GA9504@albatros> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 12:37:55 -0700 Message-ID: <1309721875.18925.30.camel@Joe-Laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Vasiliy Kulikov Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Message-ID: <20110703193755.LpZEVIgyD-4md9rojSNzSsw3C5jTjrXSNSR--ikXNYo@z> On Sun, 2011-07-03 at 23:24 +0400, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote: > Btw, if the perfomance will be acceptable, what do you think about > logging/reacting on the spotted overflows? If you do, it might be useful to track the found location(s) and only emit the overflow log entry once as found. Maybe use __builtin_return_address(depth) for tracking.