linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] Documentation: arm: [U]EFI runtime services

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: <51CC8551.1090202@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:32:49 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
CC:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
	Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"patches@...aro.org" <patches@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, matt.fleming@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Documentation: arm: [U]EFI runtime services

On 06/26/2013 07:38 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-26 at 14:59 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Jun, at 03:53:11PM, Leif Lindholm wrote:
>>> It's completely feasible, but we'd need to use a different method to do
>>> the boot services call with a 1:1 mapping (idmap support is not available
>>> until much later in the boot process).
>>
>> At least if you no longer relied upon the idmap we could potentially
>> have a single efi_enter_virtual_mode() call-site in init/main.c, which
>> would be nice.
> 
> The fixed virtual address scheme currently being looked at for x86_64 to
> make SetVirtualAddressMap() kexec invariant doesn't work on 32 bit
> because the address space isn't big enough.  For ARM, given that we've
> much more opportunity to work with the vendors, can we just avoid
> transitioning to a virtual address map and always just install a
> physical mapping before doing efi calls?
> 

What we could do on x86-32 is to map from 0xc0000000 downwards.  It
wouldn't be invariant across kernel builds with different user/kernel
split... but I'm not sure we can win that one.

The other option is to say sod it and just use straight 1:1 mapping on
32 bits...

	-hpa


--
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/