linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2 0/4] EFI 1:1 mapping

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]

Message-ID: <20130619161827.GF28300@pd.tnic>
Date:	Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:18:27 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linux EFI <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 0/4] EFI 1:1 mapping

On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 05:08:04PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> But, as always, the only reliable thing to do here is to behave as
> much like Windows as possible. Which means performing the 1:1 mapping
> but maintaining the high mapping, and passing the high values via
> SetVirtualAddressMap.

We can't pass the high values via SetVirtualAddressMap and have EFI
runtime in the kexec-ed kernel, as you and I established last week. And
since not all would want EFI runtime in the kexec-ed kernel, I'm leaning
more towards a boot-time option which enables the 1:1 mapping.

Btw, why would you even want the 1:1 mappings if we pass the high values
via SetVirtualAddressMap?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/