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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 05:56:38 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, Werner Sembach <wse@...edocomputers.com>, benoitg@...us.ca, bhelgaas@...gle.com, hpa@...or.com, juhapekka.heikkila@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, x86@...nel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] x86/resource: Do not exclude regions that are marked as MMIO in EFI memmap [+cc linux-pci] On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 11:45:38AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 12:23:31PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 10:55:49AM +0200, Werner Sembach wrote: > > > Is there any update on this matter? Also happens on discrete Thunderbolt 4 chips: > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=214259 > > > > AFAICT no updates. > > > > @Bjorn, x86 maintainers, > > > > If there are no alternatives can we get this patch merged so that people > > don't need to carry out-of-tree patches to get their systems working? > > Just my 2ยข from briefly skimming over this: > > So this reads yet again as BIOS is to blame but what else is new? > > "All in all, I think we can fix this by modifying > arch_remove_reservations() to check the EFI type as well and if it is > EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO skip the clipping in that case." > > And this like we should trust EFI to mark those regions properly, which > is more of the same but in different color. > > That original commit talks about windoze doing a different allocation > scheme and thus not trusting the untrustworthy firmware anyway and that > sounds like something we should do too. But WTH do I know?! There are a couple other threads reporting similar issues: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210624095324.34906-1-hui.wang@canonical.com https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211005150956.303707-1-hdegoede@redhat.com I think 4dc2287c1805 ("x86: avoid E820 regions when allocating address space") was a mistake and we should remove that instead of adding more complexity to it. But that requires another approach to fix the issue that 4dc2287c1805 addressed. Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists