On 02/26/2016 02:33 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
I did a quick hack of zero poisoning for the slab allocator and I
didn't see any improvement in hackbench performance which is fairly
sensitive to slab performance. This doesn't surprise me when I
actu
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> I did a quick hack of zero poisoning for the slab allocator and I
> didn't see any improvement in hackbench performance which is fairly
> sensitive to slab performance. This doesn't surprise me when I
> actually think about it.
>
> Before I se
On 02/26/2016 08:03 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
On 02/25/2016 09:35 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
Ah-ha, yes, that was one of the missing pieces:
[ 10.790970] lkdtm: Performing direct entry READ_AFTER_FREE
[ 10.790992] lkdtm: Value in memory before fre
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 02/25/2016 09:35 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Ah-ha, yes, that was one of the missing pieces:
>>
>> [ 10.790970] lkdtm: Performing direct entry READ_AFTER_FREE
>> [ 10.790992] lkdtm: Value in memory before free: 12345678
>> [ 10.790996] lk
On 02/25/2016 09:35 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
On 02/24/2016 03:37 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Laura Abbott
wrote:
Yep, looks like the v1 patches and not the v2 pa
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 02/24/2016 03:37 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Laura Abbott
>>> wrote:
Yep, looks like the v1 patches and not the v2 patches which fix
On 02/24/2016 03:37 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:
Yep, looks like the v1 patches and not the v2 patches which fix
a known issue with the zeroing.
Ah-ha, I'll go find those and retest.
I sent out
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> Yep, looks like the v1 patches and not the v2 patches which fix
>> a known issue with the zeroing.
>
> Ah-ha, I'll go find those and retest.
I sent out a series that was rebased. It works
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 02/24/2016 09:22 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> I did 3 defconfig builds as a benchmark, just to get ballpark numbers...
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>
>>> Okay, it looks like the combinations to test are:
>>>
>>>
On 02/24/2016 09:22 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
I did 3 defconfig builds as a benchmark, just to get ballpark numbers...
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
Okay, it looks like the combinations to test are:
default:
DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=n
PAGE_POISONING=n
Run times: 412.57 414.19 417.27
M
On 02/23/2016 02:37 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
zero poison only:
DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=n
PAGE_POISONING=y
PAGE_POISONING_NO_SANITY=y
PAGE_POISONING_ZERO=y
page_poison=on
This combo (in next-20160223) results in an unusable system. :(
[1.754183] rand
I did 3 defconfig builds as a benchmark, just to get ballpark numbers...
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> Okay, it looks like the combinations to test are:
>
> default:
> DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=n
> PAGE_POISONING=n
Run times: 412.57 414.19 417.27
Mean: 414.68
Std Dev: 1.95
READ_AFTE
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> zero poison only:
> DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=n
> PAGE_POISONING=y
> PAGE_POISONING_NO_SANITY=y
> PAGE_POISONING_ZERO=y
> page_poison=on
This combo (in next-20160223) results in an unusable system. :(
[1.754183] random: init urandom read with 11 bit
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 02/22/2016 11:27 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/19/2016 02:19 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Laura Abbott
wrote:
>
>
> O
On 02/22/2016 11:27 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
On 02/19/2016 02:19 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
On 02/19/2016 11:12 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Laura Abbott
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 02/19/2016 02:19 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/19/2016 11:12 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Laura Abbott
wrote:
>
>
>>
On 02/19/2016 02:19 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
On 02/19/2016 11:12 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Laura Abbott
wrote:
In a similar manner to WRITE_AFTER_FREE, add a READ_AFTER_FREE
test to test free poisoning features.
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 02/19/2016 11:12 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Laura Abbott
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> In a similar manner to WRITE_AFTER_FREE, add a READ_AFTER_FREE
>>> test to test free poisoning features. Sample output when
>>>
On 02/19/2016 11:12 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
In a similar manner to WRITE_AFTER_FREE, add a READ_AFTER_FREE
test to test free poisoning features. Sample output when
no sanitization is present:
[ 22.414170] lkdtm: Performing direct entry READ_
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>
> In a similar manner to WRITE_AFTER_FREE, add a READ_AFTER_FREE
> test to test free poisoning features. Sample output when
> no sanitization is present:
>
> [ 22.414170] lkdtm: Performing direct entry READ_AFTER_FREE
> [ 22.415124] lkdtm:
In a similar manner to WRITE_AFTER_FREE, add a READ_AFTER_FREE
test to test free poisoning features. Sample output when
no sanitization is present:
[ 22.414170] lkdtm: Performing direct entry READ_AFTER_FREE
[ 22.415124] lkdtm: Value in memory before free: 12345678
[ 22.415900] lkdtm: Attem
21 matches
Mail list logo
