linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/efi: Map EFI memmap entries in-order at runtime

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]

Message-ID: <20150929091230.GA2023@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:12:30 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Lee, Chun-Yi" <jlee@...e.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>,
	Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
	James Bottomley <JBottomley@...n.com>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/efi: Map EFI memmap entries in-order at runtime


* Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:

> > except that I don't think
> > the condition on 64-bit makes any sense:
> >
> > +       if (!efi_enabled(EFI_OLD_MEMMAP) && efi_enabled(EFI_64BIT)) {
> >
> > I can see us being nervous wrt. backported patches, but is there any strong reason
> > to not follow this up with a third (non-backported) patch that changes this to:
> >
> > +       if (!efi_enabled(EFI_OLD_MEMMAP)) {
> >
> > for v4.4?
> >
> 
> The 32-bit side essentially implements the old memmap only, which is the the 
> bottom-up version. So old memmap will be implied by 32-bit but not set in the 
> EFI flags, resulting in the reverse enumeration being used with the bottom-up 
> mapping logic. The net result of that is that we create the same problem for 
> 32-bit that we are trying to solve for 64-bit, i.e., the regions will end up in 
> reverse order in the VA mapping.
> 
> To deobfuscate this particular conditional, we could set EFI_OLD_MEMMAP 
> unconditionally on 32-bit x86. Or we could reshuffle variables and conditionals 
> in various other way.

Setting EFI_OLD_MEMMAP would be fine, if doing that has no bad side effects.

> [...] I am not convinced that the overall end result will be any better though.

That's not true, we change an obscure, implicit dependency on 32-bit detail to an 
explicit EFI_OLD_MEMMAP flag that shows exactly what's happening. That's a clear 
improvement.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/