linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] efi: Fix handling of multiple efi_fake

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]

Date:   Wed, 1 Jan 2020 10:36:50 -0800
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Taku Izumi <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com>,
        Michael Weiser <michael@...ser.dinsnail.net>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] efi: Fix handling of multiple efi_fake_mem= entries

On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 10:21 PM Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > > Does kexec preserve iomem? I.e. as long as the initial translation of
> > > efi entries to e820, and resulting resource tree, is preserved by
> > > successive kexec cycles then I think we're ok.
> >
> > It will not preserve them automatically, but that can be fixed if
> > needed.
> >
> > There are two places:
> > 1. the in kernel loader, we can do similar with below commit (for Soft
> > Reseved instead):
> > commit 980621daf368f2b9aa69c7ea01baa654edb7577b
> > Author: Lianbo Jiang <lijiang@...hat.com>
> > Date:   Tue Apr 23 09:30:07 2019 +0800
> >
> >     x86/crash: Add e820 reserved ranges to kdump kernel's e820 table
>
> Oops, that is for kdump only, for kexec, should update the kexec e820
> table.  But before doing that we need first to see if this is necessary.

We can cross that bridge later, but I expect it will eventually be
necessary. The soft-reservation facility will become more prevalent as
more platforms ship with DRAM differentiated memory ranges, like
high-bandwidth-memory, and the system needs to reserve it from general
kernel allocations. See commit 262b45ae3ab4 "x86/efi: EFI soft
reservation to E820 enumeration" and commit fe3e5e65c06e "efi:
Enumerate EFI_MEMORY_SP" for more details.