Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux?
Date: 2021-08-12 21:59:38
Message-ID: 8115.1628805578@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 3:13 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I don't see why that approach couldn't be incorporated into pg_ctl,
>> or the postmaster itself. Given Andres' point that Linux ASLR
>> disable probably has to happen in pg_ctl, it seems like doing it
>> in pg_ctl in all cases is the way to move forward.

> I think doing it in the postmaster is best, since otherwise you have
> to put code into pg_regress.c and pg_ctl.c. Here's a patch like that.

Hmm, ok. Small thought: it might be better to put the #if inside
the "else { .... }". That way it scales easily to allow other
platform-specific defaults if we find anything useful. As-is,
the obvious extension would end up with multiple else-blocks,
which seems likely to confuse pgindent if nothing else.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jacob Champion 2021-08-12 22:34:57 Re: badly calculated width of emoji in psql
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2021-08-12 21:39:36 Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux?