linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Allow the trampoline to use EFI boot services RAM

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:28:26 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	Mario Limonciello <mario_limonciello@...l.com>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Matt Fleming <mfleming@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Allow the trampoline to use EFI boot services RAM

* Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:

> As currently configured, my laptop cannot boot any existing kernel
> because the real mode trampoline can't be reserved.  The ranges in
> which it could live are rejected by the kernel: one is EFI boot
> services data and the other is above the EBDA.

Ok, so I like this series - if Matt acks it I can apply it.

How urgent is it? The 'laptop does not boot' aspect worries me - how frequently 
are systems hit by this?

The approach you chose looks sufficiently robust and straightforward to me, so it 
ought to work fine even for x86/urgent - but we can phase it into efi/core as well 
if Matt prefers that.

Thanks,

	Ingo