From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756732AbdEGWCx (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 May 2017 18:02:53 -0400 Received: from b.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.144]:44723 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755693AbdEGWCv (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 May 2017 18:02:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC, PATCH] x86_64: KAISER - do not map kernel in user mode To: Daniel Gruss References: <9df77051-ac01-bfe9-3cf7-4c2ecbcb9292@iaik.tugraz.at> <20170504154717.GA24353@infradead.org> Cc: Christoph Hellwig , kernel list , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , "clementine.maurice@iaik.tugraz.at" , "moritz.lipp@iaik.tugraz.at" , Michael Schwarz , Richard Fellner , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Ingo Molnar , "anders.fogh@gdata-adan.de" From: Richard Weinberger Message-ID: <6013bf3f-c3bd-3836-e5e2-ea89cc2e556a@nod.at> Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 00:02:41 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Daniel, Am 07.05.2017 um 23:45 schrieb Daniel Gruss: >> Just did a quick test on my main KVM host, a 8 core Intel(R) Xeon(R) >> CPU E3-1240 V2. >> KVM guests are 4.10 w/o CONFIG_KAISER and kvmconfig without CONFIG_PARAVIRT. >> Building a defconfig kernel within that guests is about 10% slower >> when CONFIG_KAISER >> is enabled. > > Thank you for testing it! :) > >> Is this expected? > > It sounds plausible. First, I would expect any form of virtualization to increase the overhead. Second, for the processor (Ivy Bridge), I would have expected even higher > performance overheads. KAISER utilizes very recent performance improvements in Intel processors... Ahh, *very* recent is the keyword then. ;) I was a bit confused since in your paper the overhead is less than 1%. What platforms did you test? i.e. how does it perform on recent AMD systems? Thanks, //richard