linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Correct for ACPI 5.1->6.0 spec changes in MADT GICC entries

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 06 Jul 2015 17:45:40 -0600
From:	Al Stone <ahs3@...hat.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>
CC:	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	"patches@...aro.org" <patches@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Correct for ACPI 5.1->6.0 spec changes in MADT
 GICC entries

On 07/06/2015 05:20 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi Al,
> 
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:16 AM, Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org> wrote:
>> In the ACPI 5.1 version of the spec, the struct for the GICC subtable
>> (struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt) of the MADT is 76 bytes long; in
>> ACPI 6.0, the struct is 80 bytes long.  But, there is only one definition
>> in ACPICA for this struct -- and that is the 6.0 version.  Hence, when
>> BAD_MADT_ENTRY() compares the struct size to the length in the GICC
>> subtable, it fails if 5.1 structs are in use, and there are systems in
>> the wild that have them.
>>
>> Note that this was found in linux-next and these patches apply against
>> that tree and the arm64 kernel tree; 4.1 does not appear to have this
>> problem since it still has the 5.1 struct definition.
>>
>> Though there is precedent in ia64 code for ignoring the changes in size,
>> this patch set instead verifies correctness.  The first patch adds the
>> BAD_MADT_GICC_ENTRY() macro to check the GICC subtable only, accounting
>> for the difference in specification versions that are possible.  The
>> second patch replaces BAD_MADT_ENTRY usage with the BAD_MADT_GICC_ENTRY
>> macro in arm64 code, which is currently the only architecture affected.
>> The BAD_MADT_ENTRY() will continue to work as is for all other MADT
>> subtables.
>>
>> I have tested these patches on an APM Mustang with version 1.15 firmware,
>> where the problem was found, and they fix the problem -- i.e., the system
>> will boot with either Linux 4.1 or linux-next kernels using the same ACPI
>> 5.1 compatible firmware.
> 
> ACK for the series, but I guess it's better to let it go via ARM64, right?
> 
> Rafael

Thanks, Rafael.  Yeah, probably so.  Will has ACKd the one patch
(2/2); if he and/or Catalin ACK patch 1/2, then this seems like it
would pretty cleanly fit into ARM64.  The only question would be if
Will or Catalin would want an ACK from Thomas on the irq-gic.c part
in 2/2.

-- 
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
ahs3@...hat.com
-----------------------------------
--
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/