linux-kernel - Re: Bug report: kernel paniced when system hibernates

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:   Thu, 25 May 2023 14:55:42 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
CC:     Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>,
        Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>, <robh@...nel.org>,
        Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@...osinc.com>,
        <jeeheng.sia@...rfivetech.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <palmer@...osinc.com>, <leyfoon.tan@...rfivetech.com>,
        <mason.huo@...rfivetech.com>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Song Shuai <suagrfillet@...il.com>,
        <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
Subject: Re: Bug report: kernel paniced when system hibernates

On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 07:13:11PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 7:08 PM Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 06:51:28PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> >
> > > > We should only rely on this node name for known bad versions of opensbi
> > > > IMO. Going forward, if something needs to be reserved for firmware, the
> > > > firmware should make sure that it is reserved by using the property for
> > > > that purpose :)
> >
> > > There is no issue with OpenSBI since it does the right thing by marking
> > > memory as reserved in the DT. This real issue is with the kernel handling
> > > of reserved memory for hibernate.
> >
> > I don't think we are talking about the same thing here. I meant the
> > no-map property which OpenSBI does not set.
> 
> Yes, we are talking about the same thing. It's not just OpenSBI not
> setting no-map property in reserved memory node because other
> SBI implementations would be doing the same thing (i.e. not setting
> no-map property)

Other SBI implementations doing the same thing doesn't make it any more
correct though, right?

> > > Like Atish mentioned, not just OpenSBI, there will be other entities
> > > (like TSM) or some other M-mode firmware which will also reserve
> > > memory in DT/ACPI so clearly kernel needs a SBI implementation
> > > independent way of handling reserved memory for hibernate.
> >
> > > > > Another option is to use compatible string or label property to indicate
> > > > > that this memory region is not to be saved/restored during hibernation.
> > > > > This can be documented in RISC-V DT bindings as well as the booting guide
> > > > > doc that alex was talking about.
> > > >
> > > > Sure, a dt-binding for sbi reserved regions doesn't immediately sound
> > > > like an awful idea... But we still have to work around the borked
> > > > firmware - be that disabling hibernation or using the mmode_resv node
> > > > when we know that the version of OpenSBI is one of those with the
> > > > problem.
> >
> > Did you skip over this? I was agreeing that defining a common binding for
> > sbi reserved regions was a good idea.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)