[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:45:05 +0100
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.5 regression fix 2/2] efi/libstub/helper: Initialize
pointer variables to zero for mixed mode
Hi,
On 12-12-2019 12:29, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 at 11:32, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> When running in EFI mixed mode (running a 64 bit kernel on 32 bit EFI
>> firmware), we _must_ initialize any pointers which are returned by
>> reference by an EFI call to NULL before making the EFI call.
>>
>> In mixed mode pointers are 64 bit, but when running on a 32 bit firmware,
>> EFI calls which return a pointer value by reference only fill the lower
>> 32 bits of the passed pointer, leaving the upper 32 bits uninitialized
>> unless we explicitly set them to 0 before the call.
>>
>> We have had this bug in the efi-stub-helper.c file reading code for
>> a while now, but this has likely not been noticed sofar because
>> this code only gets triggered when LILO style file=... arguments are
>> present on the kernel cmdline.
>>
>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub-helper.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub-helper.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub-helper.c
>> index e02579907f2e..6ca7d86743af 100644
>> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub-helper.c
>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub-helper.c
>> @@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ static efi_status_t efi_file_size(efi_system_table_t *sys_table_arg, void *__fh,
>> u64 *file_sz)
>> {
>> efi_file_handle_t *h, *fh = __fh;
>
> What about h? Doesn't it suffer from the same problem?
>
>> - efi_file_info_t *info;
>> + efi_file_info_t *info = NULL;
>> efi_status_t status;
>> efi_guid_t info_guid = EFI_FILE_INFO_ID;
>> unsigned long info_sz;
>
> And info_sz?
And "efi_file_io_interface_t *io" and "efi_file_handle_t *fh"
in efi_open_volume().
I think that is all of them.
Regards,
Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists