linux-kernel - Re: efi_enabled(EFI

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: <57261483.10500@linaro.org>
Date:	Sun, 1 May 2016 22:36:51 +0800
From:	Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@...aro.org>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
Cc:	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
	Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	Xen Devel <Xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: efi_enabled(EFI_PARAVIRT) use

On 2016年05月01日 21:26, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Sun, 01 May, at 11:24:18AM, Shannon Zhao wrote:
>> Because the UEFI params for Dom0 are located under /hypervisor/uefi node
>> instead of /chosen. So it needs to check whether it's a Dom0 then search
>> and parse different node with different params arrays.
>  
> Why can't you search both nodes? 
Before searching, it needs to decide which uefi params array should be
passed to of_scan_flat_dt().

> Would you ever expect to see both for
> a Dom0 kernel?
> 
>> So it still needs add another check to firstly parse the fdt to see if
>> there is "xen,uefi-system-table" under /hypervisor/uefi node, right? I
>> think it's a bit redundant compared with xen_initial_domain().
> 
> Sometimes you really do need to check xen_initial_domain(), but I do
> not think this is such a case. And if we can get by without adding
> that check, the code will be better for it.
> 
So is there any other way you suggest?

Thanks,
-- 
Shannon