Re: [Xen-devel] x86: PIE support and option to extend KASLR randomization

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>]

* Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > > -model=small/medium assume you are on the low 32-bit. It generates 
> > > instructions where the virtual addresses have the high 32-bit to be zero.
> >
> > How are these assumptions hardcoded by GCC? Most of the instructions should 
> > be 
> > relocatable straight away, as most call/jump/branch instructions are 
> > RIP-relative.
> 
> I think PIE is capable to use relative instructions well. mcmodel=large 
> assumes 
> symbols can be anywhere.

So if the numbers in your changelog and Kconfig text cannot be trusted, there's 
this description of the size impact which I suspect is less susceptible to 
measurement error:

+         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.

... but describing a 1-2% kernel text size increase as "slightly more assembly" 
shows a gratituous disregard to kernel code generation quality! In reality 
that's 
a huge size increase that in most cases will almost directly transfer to a 1-2% 
slowdown for kernel intense workloads.

Where does that size increase come from, if PIE is capable of using relative 
instructins well? Does it come from the loss of a generic register and the 
resulting increase in register pressure, stack spills, etc.?

So I'm still unhappy about this all, and about the attitude surrounding it.

Thanks,

        Ingo

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel