linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] efi: arch, x86: arch, ia64: move efi_mem

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: <20150602133647.GC6826@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date:	Tue, 2 Jun 2015 14:36:47 +0100
From:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To:	"Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang" <zjzhang@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	leif.lindholm@...aro.org, al.stone@...aro.org, fu.wei@...aro.org,
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org,
	vgandhi@...eaurora.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] efi: arch, x86: arch, ia64: move
 efi_mem_attributes()

(Cc'ing Tony for ia64 input)

On Mon, 01 Jun, at 12:12:18PM, Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang wrote:
> From: "Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang" <zjzhang@...eaurora.org>
> 
> Both x86 and ia64 implemented efi_mem_attributs(), which is architecture
> agnositc. This function is moved from arch/x86 and arch/ia64 to
> drivers/firmware/efi.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@...eaurora.org>
> ---
>  arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c      | 11 -----------
>  arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c | 18 ------------------
>  drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c  | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c b/arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c
> index c52d7540dc05..ef20ec784b04 100644
> --- a/arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c
> +++ b/arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c
> @@ -771,17 +771,6 @@ efi_mem_type (unsigned long phys_addr)
>  }
>  
>  u64
> -efi_mem_attributes (unsigned long phys_addr)
> -{
> -	efi_memory_desc_t *md = efi_memory_descriptor(phys_addr);
> -
> -	if (md)
> -		return md->attribute;
> -	return 0;
> -}
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(efi_mem_attributes);
> -
> -u64
>  efi_mem_attribute (unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size)
>  {
>  	unsigned long end = phys_addr + size;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
> index 02744df576d5..10bd5289c593 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
> @@ -926,24 +926,6 @@ u32 efi_mem_type(unsigned long phys_addr)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -u64 efi_mem_attributes(unsigned long phys_addr)
> -{
> -	efi_memory_desc_t *md;
> -	void *p;
> -
> -	if (!efi_enabled(EFI_MEMMAP))
> -		return 0;
> -
> -	for (p = memmap.map; p < memmap.map_end; p += memmap.desc_size) {
> -		md = p;
> -		if ((md->phys_addr <= phys_addr) &&
> -		    (phys_addr < (md->phys_addr +
> -				  (md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT))))
> -			return md->attribute;
> -	}
> -	return 0;
> -}
> -
>  static int __init arch_parse_efi_cmdline(char *str)
>  {
>  	if (parse_option_str(str, "old_map"))
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> index 3061bb8629dc..86da85368778 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> @@ -517,3 +517,21 @@ char * __init efi_md_typeattr_format(char *buf, size_t size,
>  			 attr & EFI_MEMORY_UC      ? "UC"  : "");
>  	return buf;
>  }
> +
> +u64 efi_mem_attributes(unsigned long phys_addr)
> +{
> +	efi_memory_desc_t *md;
> +	void *p;
> +
> +	if (!efi_enabled(EFI_MEMMAP))
> +		return 0;
> +

Umm... ia64 doesn't appear to set EFI_MEMMAP. So doesn't this change
actively break ia64?

While I like the idea of de-duplication, the two implementations of
efi_mem_attributes() are not equivalent.

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/