From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Jordan Glover <Golden_Miller83@protonmail.ch>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@google.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@mellanox.com>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Peter Foley <pefoley2@pefoley.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
"H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: x86: PIE support and option to extend KASLR randomization
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 09:42:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1502804557.6577.61.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ivFwkYub2xhfl1WsxFJ7rARXO9-8ijXuThISjaPUTE7KlKY-FxIcEGkpLtPn9YPtrVqY2FtYVYlZbngdOaHkDytuDvbzTA1KUkLnqnrOOGc=@protonmail.ch>
On Tue, 2017-08-15 at 08:15 -0400, Jordan Glover wrote:
> Hello,
> I write to put different perspective into the topic. I'm glad that
> kernel developers care about performance optimizations and I see how
> 10% overhead can be a problem for some. On the other hand last ten
> years gave us 1000% faster hardware which trumps anything software
> can do. For many users like us performance isn't a problem, we have
> plenty of it and if we haven't we can buy it. It can be money
> problem, not software engineering problem.
CPUs stopped getting faster at a dramatic rate, though,
while network cards continue to get faster.
In some areas, the kernel is more squeezed for CPU cycles
today than it has ever been before.
Ingo is suggesting that the security enhancement be
implemented in a way that doesn't come with a 10% performance
gain. There are other ways to relocate a kernel than with PIE.
parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-15 13:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <ivFwkYub2xhfl1WsxFJ7rARXO9-8ijXuThISjaPUTE7KlKY-FxIcEGkpLtPn9YPtrVqY2FtYVYlZbngdOaHkDytuDvbzTA1KUkLnqnrOOGc=@protonmail.ch>]
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=1502804557.6577.61.camel@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=Golden_Miller83@protonmail.ch \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@mellanox.com \
--cc=danielmicay@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=markus@trippelsdorf.de \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=pefoley2@pefoley.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=thgarnie@google.com \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tj@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox