Re: x86: PIE support and option to extend KASLR randomization

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:38 AM, H. Peter Anvin [off-list ref] wrote:

On 09/22/17 09:32, Ingo Molnar wrote:

quoted

BTW., I think things improved with ORC because with ORC we have RBP as an extra
register and with PIE we lose RBX - so register pressure in code generation is
lower.

We lose EBX on 32 bits, but we don't lose RBX on 64 bits - since x86-64
has RIP-relative addressing there is no need for a dedicated PIC register.

I'm somewhat confused how we can have as much as almost 1% overhead.  I
suspect that we end up making a GOT and maybe even a PLT for no good reason.

We have a GOT with very few entries, mainly linker script globals that
I think we can work to reduce or remove.

We have a PLT but it is empty. On latest iteration (not sent yet),
modules have PLT32 relocations but no PLT entry. I got rid of
mcmodel=large for modules and instead I move the beginning of the
module section just after the kernel so relative relocations work.

        -hpa

-- 
Thomas