[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190214210839.fpghjsexpfid4bc4@hpe.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:08:39 -0600
From: Russ Anderson <rja@....com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: Hedi Berriche <hedi.berriche@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 0/4] Protect against concurrent calls into UV BIOS
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 09:17:37AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 20:34, Hedi Berriche <hedi.berriche@....com> wrote:
> >
> > - Changes since v2
> > Addressed comments from Ard Biesheuvel:
> > * expose efi_runtime_lock to UV platform only instead of globally
> > * remove unnecessary #ifdef CONFIG_EFI from bios_uv.c
> >
> > - Changes since v1:
> > Addressed comments from Bhupesh Sharma, Thomas Gleixner, and Ard Biesheuvel:
> > * made __uv_bios_call() static
> > * moved the efi_enabled() cleanup to its own patchlet
> > * explained the reason for renaming the efi_runtime_lock semaphore
> > * dropped the reviewed-bys as they should be given on the mailing list
> > * Cc'ng stable@...r.kernel.org given the nature of the problem addressed by the patches
> >
>
> Hi Hedi,
>
> The patches look good to me now.
>
> For the series,
>
> Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
>
> However, I don't think all the patches should go to -stable. Only 4/4
> fixes an actual bug, and the remaining patches don't look like they
> are prerequisites for that change.
>
> Also, if your colleagues reviewed your patches, now would be the time
> to ask them to give their Reviewed-by as well.
Reviewed-by: Russ Anderson <rja@....com>
Thanks.
> --
> Ard.
>
>
>
> > ---
> >
> > Calls into UV BIOS were not being serialised which is wrong as it violates EFI
> > runtime rules, and bad as it does result in all sorts of potentially hard to
> > track down hangs and panics when efi_scratch.prev_mm gets clobbered whenever
> > efi_switch_mm() gets called concurrently from two different CPUs.
> >
> > Patch #1 removes an unnecessary #ifdef CONFIG_EFI guard from bios_uv.c.
> >
> > Patch #2 removes uv_bios_call_reentrant() because it's dead code.
> >
> > Patch #3 is a cleanup that drops test_bit() in favour of the ad hoc efi_enabled().
> >
> > Patch #4 makes uv_bios_call() variants use the efi_runtime_lock semaphore to
> > protect against concurrency.
> >
> > Cc: Russ Anderson <rja@....com>
> > Cc: Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>
> > Cc: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>
> > Cc: Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com>
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v4.9+
> >
> > Hedi Berriche (4):
> > x86/platform/UV: remove unnecessary #ifdef CONFIG_EFI
> > x86/platform/UV: kill uv_bios_call_reentrant() as it has no callers
> > x86/platform/UV: use efi_enabled() instead of test_bit()
> > x86/platform/UV: use efi_runtime_lock to serialise BIOS calls
> >
> > arch/x86/include/asm/uv/bios.h | 13 ++++-----
> > arch/x86/platform/uv/bios_uv.c | 35 ++++++++++++++-----------
> > drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c | 7 +++++
> > 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> >
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
--
Russ Anderson, SuperDome Flex Linux Kernel Group Manager
HPE - Hewlett Packard Enterprise (formerly SGI) rja@....com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists