linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 13/20] x86/efistub: Perform 4/5 level paging switch from the stub

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMj1kXHCAnNDFt+Ksex24PJj_rx5GcUsiS=S3OSZ6dw1HNOH3w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2023 08:34:38 +0200
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To:     Yunhong Jiang <yunhong.jiang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Evgeniy Baskov <baskov@...ras.ru>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>,
        Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
        Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>,
        Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
        Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/20] x86/efistub: Perform 4/5 level paging switch
 from the stub

On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 02:43, Yunhong Jiang
<yunhong.jiang@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 10:31:43PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 22:19, Yunhong Jiang
> > <yunhong.jiang@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 09:23:35AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
...
> > > > +efi_status_t efi_setup_5level_paging(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +     u8 tmpl_size = (u8 *)&trampoline_ljmp_imm_offset - (u8 *)&trampoline_32bit_src;
> > > > +     efi_status_t status;
> > > > +     u8 *la57_code;
> > > > +
> > > > +     if (!efi_is_64bit())
> > > > +             return EFI_SUCCESS;
> > > > +
> > > > +     /* check for 5 level paging support */
> > > > +     if (native_cpuid_eax(0) < 7 ||
> > > > +         !(native_cpuid_ecx(7) & (1 << (X86_FEATURE_LA57 & 31))))
> > > > +             return EFI_SUCCESS;
> > > > +
> > > Do we need to check the need_toggle here instead of at efi_5level_switch and
> > > skip the whole setup if no need to switch the paging level? Sorry if I missed
> > > any point.
> > >
> >
> > No. There are reasons why firmware might run with 5 levels, and switch
> > to 4 levels at ExitBootServices() time.
>
> The need_toggle check at efi_5level_switch(), "need_toggle = want_la57 ^
> have_la57", should cover this scenario, right? If we check need_toggle on
> efi_setup_5level_paging() and it's false, then we don't need the setup in
> efi_setup_5level_paging(), right? I don't see the  la57_toggle() called on other
> places.
>
> Or I misunderstand your response?
>

The actual, current number of paging levels could be 5 during
efi_setup_5level_paging() and 4 during efi_5level_switch(). So whether
we need to toggle can only be decided at switch time, at which point
we can no longer allocate memory. So the allocation logic in
efi_setup_5level_paging() cannot depend on the actual number of
levels, only on whether or not 5 level paging is supported at all (in
which case a switch is never needed)