linux-kernel - Re: Fwd: [Bug 150021] New: kernel panic: "kernel tried to execute NX-protected page" when resuming from hibernate to disk

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: <1670639.GCDubuBUSI@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jul 2016 01:29:49 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, shuzzle@...lbox.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: [Bug 150021] New: kernel panic: "kernel tried to execute NX-protected page" when resuming from hibernate to disk

On Thursday, July 28, 2016 01:20:53 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 05:17:38 PM Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:12:15AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 12:59:18 PM Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > > Hm... I have a theory, but I'm not sure about it.  I noticed that
> > > > x86_acpi_enter_sleep_state(),
> > > 
> > > I think you mean x86_acpi_suspend_lowlevel().
> > 
> > Oops!
> > 
> > > > which is involved in suspend, overwrites
> > > > several global variables (e.g, initial_code) which are used by the CPU
> > > > boot code in head_64.S.  But surprisingly, it doesn't restore those
> > > > variables to their original values after it resumes.
> > > 
> > > Is the head_64.S code also used to bring up offline CPUs?
> > 
> > Yes.
> 
> OK
> 
> So it is really interesting why and how that stuff works for everybody.
> 
> Basically, CPU online should fail after a suspend-resume cycle, but it
> doesn't most of the time AFAICS.

do_boot_cpu() restores those values, so I think we're safe from that angle.

That should apply to the CPU online during resume from hibernation too.

Thanks,
Rafael