linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] s390/vmcore: Use ELF header in new memory feature

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: <20130703145020.GD1460@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:50:20 -0400
From:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To:	Michael Holzheu <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com>,
	Jan Willeke <willeke@...ibm.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] s390/vmcore: Use ELF header in new memory feature

On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 04:39:44PM +0200, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:15:29 -0400
> Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 09:59:13AM +0200, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 12:23:23 -0400
> > > Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 09:32:36PM +0200, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > [..]
> > > > > +ssize_t elfcorehdr_read(char *buf, size_t count, u64 *ppos)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > +	void *src = (void *)(unsigned long)*ppos;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	src = elfcorehdr_newmem ? src : src - OLDMEM_BASE;
> > > > 
> > > > Seriously, we need to get rid of all this OLDMEM_BASE logic in s390
> > > > specific code. For regular kdump, it is no different than x86. Only
> > > > special handling required for zfcpdump for HSA region.
> > > > 
> > > > Why do we need above. Is it to cover the case where elfcorehdr have
> > > > been prepared by user space? Are elf headers initially stored in
> > > > reserved region and then swapped. Why do we need to swap these or
> > > > why kexec-tools could not take care of swapping it.
> > > 
> > > I know it is confusing. The "src - OLDMEM_BASE" term is currently
> > > needed because of the swap issue that we have discussed already. We
> > > load the ELF header into reserved memory
> > > [OLDMEM_BASE, OLDMEM_BASE + OLDMEM_SIZE] that is swapped with
> > > [0, OLDMEM_SIZE]. So the ELF header address has to be adjusted.
> > 
> > Can't kexec-tools could easily do this swapping and modify elfcorehdr=
> > command line accordingly so that second kernel does not have to do
> > swapping for ELF headers.
> > 
> > And for PT_LOAD segment swapping, we could use ELF header swapping trick
> > (again in kexec-tools).
> > 
> > After above two changes I think all the OLD_MEMBASE magic will go away
> > from s390 code and only HSA region special handling will remain.
> > 
> > This brings it inline with x86 code and it becomes easier to understand
> > the s390 code. Otherwise there so may special corner cases that it is
> > easy to get lost.
> 
> Right, I agree that it is possible to do the swap in the kexec tool.
> Then we would load in the kexec tool the ELF header to address
> "OLDMEM_BASE + addr" (or "crashkernel base + addr") and would specify
> the kernel parameter as "elfcorehdr=addr".

Exactly. purgatory does swap and kexec-tools prepares the purgatory and 
it knows that swap will take place so it can pass elfcorehdr=addr,
instead of elfcorehdr=OLDMEM_BASE.

Hardcoding this knowledge in second kernel is not a very good idea.

Thanks
Vivek
--
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/