| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20180223110143.1747fb3f@ThinkPad>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:01:43 +0100
From: Philipp Rudo <prudo@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>, x86@...nel.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/17] Add kexec_file_load support to s390
Hi Dave
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:34:05 +0800
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 02/14/18 at 10:54am, Philipp Rudo wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > I just browsed AKASHI's patches (v7). The way I see it the common code changes
> > are on different areas of kexec_file and shouldn't get in conflict. Only in the
> > arch code (s390 and arm64) some function calls might need an update. But I have
> > to take a closer look on the patches first.
>
> I'm tring both in local branch with both series (V8 from AKASHI and this series),
> but there are indeed some conflicts, may because AKASHI factored out some arch
> code from ppc/x86 to common code.
I feared this would happen. I didn't have time to look at AKASHI's v8
yesterday but hope to find some today. How do you think i should handle
conflicts with his patches? I don't think it is wise to include the changes
into my patches as that would make AKASHI's patches a prereq for mine. Is adding
one (multiple?) fixup patches on top of my series ok for you?
Thanks
Philipp
> >
> > @AKASHI: Welcome to the list. While browsing I couldn't find any
> > arch_apply_relocation function for arm64. These require the biggest changes in
> > my patch set. Did I just miss it or does arm64 work differently?
> >
> > @Dave: Happy holiday
>
> Thank you!
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > Philipp
> >
> > On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:35:43 +0800
> > Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Philipp,
> > >
> > > I added AKASHI in cc, he posted arm64 kexec_file series previously.
> > > I would like to read both series especially the general part, but
> > > maybe at the end of this month because of a holiday..
> > >
> > > From the patch log the cleanup looks nice, but still need read the
> > > details.
> > >
> > > On 02/12/18 at 11:07am, Philipp Rudo wrote:
> > > > Hi everybody
> > > >
> > > > resending the series as there was no reaction, yet. Furthermore i was told
> > > > that Andrew and the x86 list should also be CCed, so welcome.
> > > >
> > > > No changes made to the patches since first time i sent them. The patches
> > > > apply to the current master (v4.16-rc1).
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Philipp
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > this series adds the kexec_file_load system call to s390. Before the system
> > > > call is added there are some preparations/clean ups to common
> > > > kexec_file_load. In detail this series contains:
> > > >
> > > > Patch #1&2: Minor cleanups/fixes.
> > > >
> > > > Patch #3-9: Clean up the purgatory load/relocation code. Especially remove
> > > > the mis-use of the purgatory_info->sechdrs->sh_offset field, currently
> > > > holding a pointer into either kexec_purgatory (ro) or purgatory_buf (rw)
> > > > depending on the section. With these patches the section address will be
> > > > calculated verbosely and sh_offset will contain the offset of the section
> > > > in the stripped purgatory binary (purgatory_buf).
> > > >
> > > > Patch #10: Allows architectures to set the purgaory load address. This
> > > > patch is important for s390 as the kernel and purgatory have to be loaded
> > > > to fixed addresses. In current code this is impossible as the purgatory
> > > > load is opaque to the architecture.
> > > >
> > > > Patch #11: Moves x86 purgatories sha implementation to common lib/
> > > > directory.
> > > >
> > > > Patches #12-17 finally adds the kexec_file_load system call to s390.
> > > >
> > > > Please note that I had to touch arch code for x86 and power a little. In
> > > > theory this should not change the behavior but I don't have a way to test
> > > > it. Cross-compiling with defconfig(*) works fine for both.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Philipp
> > > >
> > > > (*) On x86 with the orc unwinder turned off. objtool SEGFAULTs on s390...
> > > >
> > > > Philipp Rudo (17):
> > > > kexec_file: Silence compile warnings
> > > > kexec_file: Remove checks in kexec_purgatory_load
> > > > kexec_file: Make purgatory_info->ehdr const
> > > > kexec_file: Search symbols in read-only kexec_purgatory
> > > > kexec_file: Use read-only sections in arch_kexec_apply_relocations*
> > > > kexec_file: Split up __kexec_load_puragory
> > > > kexec_file: Simplify kexec_purgatory_setup_sechdrs 1
> > > > kexec_file: Simplify kexec_purgatory_setup_sechdrs 2
> > > > kexec_file: Remove mis-use of sh_offset field
> > > > kexec_file: Allow archs to set purgatory load address
> > > > kexec_file: Move purgatories sha256 to common code
> > > > s390/kexec_file: Prepare setup.h for kexec_file_load
> > > > s390/kexec_file: Add purgatory
> > > > s390/kexec_file: Add kexec_file_load system call
> > > > s390/kexec_file: Add image loader
> > > > s390/kexec_file: Add crash support to image loader
> > > > s390/kexec_file: Add ELF loader
> > > >
> > > > arch/powerpc/kernel/kexec_elf_64.c | 9 +-
> > > > arch/s390/Kbuild | 1 +
> > > > arch/s390/Kconfig | 4 +
> > > > arch/s390/include/asm/kexec.h | 23 ++
> > > > arch/s390/include/asm/purgatory.h | 17 ++
> > > > arch/s390/include/asm/setup.h | 40 ++-
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/Makefile | 1 +
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 5 +
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.c | 1 +
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/kexec_elf.c | 149 ++++++++++
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/kexec_image.c | 78 +++++
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c | 291 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 1 +
> > > > arch/s390/purgatory/Makefile | 37 +++
> > > > arch/s390/purgatory/head.S | 279 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > > arch/s390/purgatory/purgatory.c | 42 +++
> > > > arch/x86/kernel/kexec-bzimage64.c | 8 +-
> > > > arch/x86/kernel/machine_kexec_64.c | 66 ++---
> > > > arch/x86/purgatory/Makefile | 3 +
> > > > arch/x86/purgatory/purgatory.c | 2 +-
> > > > include/linux/kexec.h | 38 +--
> > > > {arch/x86/purgatory => include/linux}/sha256.h | 10 +-
> > > > kernel/kexec_file.c | 375 ++++++++++++-------------
> > > > {arch/x86/purgatory => lib}/sha256.c | 4 +-
> > > > 24 files changed, 1200 insertions(+), 284 deletions(-)
> > > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/include/asm/purgatory.h
> > > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/kernel/kexec_elf.c
> > > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/kernel/kexec_image.c
> > > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c
> > > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/purgatory/Makefile
> > > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/purgatory/head.S
> > > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/purgatory/purgatory.c
> > > > rename {arch/x86/purgatory => include/linux}/sha256.h (63%)
> > > > rename {arch/x86/purgatory => lib}/sha256.c (99%)
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 2.13.5
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > kexec mailing list
> > > > kexec@...ts.infradead.org
> > > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Dave
> > >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists