mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Indan Zupancic" <indan@nul.nu>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: "Andrew Lutomirski" <luto@mit.edu>,
	"Will Drewry" <wad@chromium.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de,
	davem@davemloft.net, mingo@redhat.com, oleg@redhat.com,
	peterz@infradead.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net,
	mcgrathr@chromium.org, tglx@linutronix.de, eparis@redhat.com,
	serge.hallyn@canonical.com, djm@mindrot.org,
	scarybeasts@gmail.com, pmoore@redhat.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, corbet@lwn.net,
	eric.dumazet@gmail.com, markus@chromium.org,
	keescook@chromium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/8] seccomp: add system call filtering using BPF
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 04:27:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b33f697878e9b601d1d9bddfbf7a61cb.squirrel@webmail.greenhost.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F3DB9E8.7040406@zytor.com>

On Fri, February 17, 2012 03:22, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/16/2012 06:16 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> Is there really no syscall that cares about endianness?

Perhaps when 64-bit syscall args are passed via two 32-bit registers.
But that is no argument to make all argument accesses endianness aware.

>> Even if it ends up working, forcing syscall arguments to have a
>> particular endianness seems like a bad decision, especially if anyone
>> ever wants to make a 64-bit BPF implementation.  (Or if any
>> architecture adds 128-bit syscall arguments to a future syscall
>> namespace or whatever it's called.  x86-64 has 128-bit xmm
>> registers...)
>>
>
> Not to mention that the reshuffling code will add totally unnecessary
> cost to the normal operation.

There is no such extra cost.

> Either way, Indan has it backwards ... it
> *is* one field, the fact that two operations is needed to access it is a
> function of the underlying byte code, and even if the byte code can't
> support it, a JIT could merge adjacent operations if 64-bit operations
> are possible -- or we could (and arguably should) add 64-bit opcodes in
> the future for efficiency.

It is a virtual data structure with as sole purpose to provide syscall
info to the byte code. The actual data structure as such never exists
in memory. So giving something that is hard to digest is silly.

A JIT won't be able to merge accesses because it also has to merge other
instructions and recognize when 64-bit operations are done with 32-bit
instructions. I think that will be too hard for a JIT.

The only good reason to use 64 bit fields is if 64-bit support will be
added to BPF in the future. If not, then it's just unnecessary pain for
no good reason.

An alternative to struct seccomp_data would be to add special instructions
that load the desired info to 'A'. E.g. BPF_S_ANC_SYSCALL_ARG with 'k'
selecting which arg. But that's probably harder to fit into the current
filter code.

Greetings,

Indan



  reply	other threads:[~2012-02-17  3:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-16 20:02 [PATCH v8 1/8] sk_run_filter: add support for custom load_pointer Will Drewry
2012-02-16 20:02 ` [PATCH v8 2/8] seccomp: kill the seccomp_t typedef Will Drewry
2012-02-20  2:55   ` James Morris
2012-02-16 20:02 ` [PATCH v8 3/8] seccomp: add system call filtering using BPF Will Drewry
2012-02-16 20:06   ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-16 20:25     ` Will Drewry
2012-02-16 21:17       ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-16 21:28         ` Markus Gutschke
2012-02-16 21:34           ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-16 21:51             ` Will Drewry
2012-02-16 22:06               ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-16 23:00                 ` Will Drewry
2012-02-17  0:23                   ` Andrew Lutomirski
2012-02-17  0:43                   ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-17  0:50                   ` Eric Paris
2012-02-17  2:24                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-17  3:53                     ` Will Drewry
2012-02-17  4:12                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-17  4:26                         ` Will Drewry
2012-02-17  4:32                           ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-17  4:40                             ` Will Drewry
2012-02-16 21:31         ` Will Drewry
2012-02-17  0:48         ` Indan Zupancic
2012-02-17  0:51           ` Andrew Lutomirski
2012-02-17  1:10             ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-17  1:25             ` Indan Zupancic
2012-02-17  1:33           ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-17  2:00             ` Indan Zupancic
2012-02-17  2:16               ` Andrew Lutomirski
2012-02-17  2:22                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-17  3:27                   ` Indan Zupancic [this message]
2012-02-17  4:09                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-17  4:51                       ` Indan Zupancic
2012-02-17  2:44   ` Indan Zupancic
2012-02-17  3:38     ` [kernel-hardening] " Will Drewry
2012-02-16 20:02 ` [PATCH v8 4/8] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ERRNO Will Drewry
2012-02-16 20:02 ` [PATCH v8 5/8] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_RET_TRAP Will Drewry
     [not found]   ` <CAE6n16mCrJC=Sre+PT1H_VfSjW0MGyi0xtEcdcRvGMvvwXWzmA@mail.gmail.com>
2012-02-16 20:28     ` Markus Gutschke
2012-02-16 21:23       ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-16 20:42     ` Will Drewry
2012-02-16 21:11       ` [PATCH v9 " Will Drewry
2012-02-16 21:11         ` [PATCH v9 8/8] Documentation: prctl/seccomp_filter Will Drewry
2012-02-16 21:28       ` [PATCH v8 5/8] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_RET_TRAP H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-16 21:33         ` Will Drewry
2012-02-16 20:02 ` [PATCH v8 6/8] ptrace,seccomp: Add PTRACE_SECCOMP support Will Drewry
2012-02-17  5:08   ` Indan Zupancic
2012-02-17 16:23     ` Will Drewry
2012-02-17 22:55       ` Indan Zupancic
2012-02-21 17:31         ` Will Drewry
2012-02-16 20:02 ` [PATCH v8 7/8] x86: Enable HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER Will Drewry
2012-02-16 20:02 ` [PATCH v8 8/8] Documentation: prctl/seccomp_filter Will Drewry
2012-02-16 20:08 ` [PATCH v8 1/8] sk_run_filter: add support for custom load_pointer Will Drewry
2012-02-17  1:54 ` Joe Perches
2012-02-17  2:22   ` Will Drewry
2012-02-17  3:04 ` Indan Zupancic
2012-02-17  4:13   ` Will Drewry
2012-02-17  5:05     ` Indan Zupancic

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=b33f697878e9b601d1d9bddfbf7a61cb.squirrel@webmail.greenhost.nl \
    --to=indan@nul.nu \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=djm@mindrot.org \
    --cc=eparis@redhat.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@mit.edu \
    --cc=markus@chromium.org \
    --cc=mcgrathr@chromium.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pmoore@redhat.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
    --cc=scarybeasts@gmail.com \
    --cc=serge.hallyn@canonical.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=wad@chromium.org \
    --cc=x86@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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®