linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 7/7] x86/crash: Add x86 crash hotplug support

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:   Fri, 7 Oct 2022 14:56:00 -0500
From:   Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@...cle.com>
To:     Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
        dyoung@...hat.com, bhe@...hat.com, vgoyal@...hat.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        hpa@...or.com, nramas@...ux.microsoft.com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
        robh@...nel.org, efault@....de, rppt@...nel.org, david@...hat.com,
        konrad.wilk@...cle.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 7/7] x86/crash: Add x86 crash hotplug support



On 10/4/22 02:03, Sourabh Jain wrote:
> 
> On 30/09/22 21:06, Eric DeVolder wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 9/28/22 11:07, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 02:12:31PM -0500, Eric DeVolder wrote:
>>>> This topic was discussed previously https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/3/3/372.
>>>
>>> Please do not use lkml.org to refer to lkml messages. We have a
>>> perfectly fine archival system at lore.kernel.org. You simply do
>>>
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/<Message-ID>
>>>
>>> when you want to point to a previous mail.
>>
>> ok, thanks for pointing that out to me.
>>>
>>>> David points out that terminology is tricky here due to differing behaviors.
>>>> And perhaps that is your point in asking for guidance text. It can be
>>>> complicated
>>>
>>> Which means you need an explanation how to use this even more.
>>>
>>> And why is CONFIG_CRASH_MAX_MEMORY_RANGES even a Kconfig item and not
>>> something you discover from the hardware?
>>
>> No, is the short answer.
>>
>>>
>>> Your help text talks about System RAM entries in /proc/iomem which means
>>> that those entries are present somewhere in the kernel and you can read
>>> them out and do the proper calculations dynamically instead of doing the
>>> static CONFIG_NR_CPUS_DEFAULT + CONFIG_CRASH_MAX_MEMORY_RANGES thing.
>>
>> The intent is to compute the max size buffer needed to contain a maximum populated elfcorehdr, 
>> which is primarily based on the number of CPUs and memory regions. Thus far I (and others 
>> involved) have not found a kernel method to determine the maximum number of memory regions 
>> possible (if you are aware of one, please let me know!). Thus CONFIG_CRASH_MAX_MEMORY_RANGES was 
>> born (rather borrowed from kexec-tools).
>>
>> So no dynamic computation is possible, yet.
> 
> Hello Eric,
> 
> How about allocating buffer space for max program header possible in a elfcorehdr?
> 
> mage->elf_headers_sz = kbuf.memsz = PN_XNUM * sizeof(Elf64_Phdr);
> 
> PN_XNUM is part of linux/elf.h (include/uapi/linux/elf.h).
> 
> Refer below link for more details:
> https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man5/elf.5.html
> 
> Thanks,
> Sourabh Jain
> 

Well, that is an idea. I'm not sure it is the answer yet, but if I do compute
a value, then that value needs to be checked against PN_XNUM so it still results
in a valid elfcorehdr.

Thanks,
eric