[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] x86: PIE support and option to extend KASLR randomization
- To: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 09:56:09 +0200
- Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@xxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>, kvm list <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>, Christopher Li <sparse@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>, David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Foley <pefoley2@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Joerg Roedel <joro@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>, Daniel Micay <danielmicay@xxxxxxxxx>, Baoquan He <bhe@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sparse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-arch <linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx>, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxx>, Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx>, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, Linux PM list <linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@xxxxxxxxx>, "H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@xxxxxxxxx>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kyle Huey <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Lukas Wunner <lukas@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Rob Landley <rob@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@xxxxxxx>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S . Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 07:56:36 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
* Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Do these changes get us closer to being able to build the kernel as truly
> > position independent, i.e. to place it anywhere in the valid x86-64 address
> > space? Or any other advantages?
>
> Yes, PIE allows us to put the kernel anywhere in memory. It will allow us to
> have a full randomized address space where position and order of sections are
> completely random. There is still some work to get there but being able to
> build
> a PIE kernel is a significant step.
So I _really_ dislike the whole PIE approach, because of the huge slowdown:
+config RANDOMIZE_BASE_LARGE
+ bool "Increase the randomization range of the kernel image"
+ depends on X86_64 && RANDOMIZE_BASE
+ select X86_PIE
+ select X86_MODULE_PLTS if MODULES
+ default n
+ ---help---
+ Build the kernel as a Position Independent Executable (PIE) and
+ increase the available randomization range from 1GB to 3GB.
+
+ This option impacts performance on kernel CPU intensive workloads up
+ to 10% due to PIE generated code. Impact on user-mode processes and
+ typical usage would be significantly less (0.50% when you build the
+ kernel).
+
+ The kernel and modules will generate slightly more assembly (1 to 2%
+ increase on the .text sections). The vmlinux binary will be
+ significantly smaller due to less relocations.
To put 10% kernel overhead into perspective: enabling this option wipes out
about
5-10 years worth of painstaking optimizations we've done to keep the kernel
fast
... (!!)
I think the fundamental flaw is the assumption that we need a PIE executable to
have a freely relocatable kernel on 64-bit CPUs.
Have you considered a kernel with -mcmodel=small (or medium) instead of -fpie
-mcmodel=large? We can pick a random 2GB window in the (non-kernel) canonical
x86-64 address space to randomize the location of kernel text. The location of
modules can be further randomized within that 2GB window.
It should have far less performance impact than the register-losing and
overhead-inducing -fpie / -mcmodel=large (for modules) execution models.
My quick guess is tha the performance impact might be close to zero in fact.
Thanks,
Ingo
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|