[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240605110904.GWZmBHUHSqCJVQYajF@fat_crate.local>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 13:09:04 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>, ardb@...nel.org,
dan.j.williams@...el.com
Cc: "Kalra, Ashish" <ashish.kalra@....com>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, rafael@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
peterz@...radead.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, jun.nakajima@...el.com,
rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
michael.roth@....com, seanjc@...gle.com, kai.huang@...el.com,
bhe@...hat.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, bdas@...hat.com,
vkuznets@...hat.com, dionnaglaze@...gle.com, anisinha@...hat.com,
jroedel@...e.de, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] efi/x86: Fix EFI memory map corruption with kexec
Moving Ard and Dan to To:
On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 10:28:18AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> Ok, thanks! I think the right way is creating two patches, one to
> remove the __efi_memmap_free,
Yap, that
f0ef6523475f ("efi: Fix efi_memmap_alloc() leaks")
needs revisiting.
So AFAIU, the flow is this:
In a kexec-ed kernel:
1. efi_arch_mem_reserve() gets called by bgrt, erst, mokvar... whatever
to hold on to boot services regions for longer otherwise EFI
"implementations" explode.
2. On same kexec-ed kernel, we call into kexec_enter_virtual_mode()
because it needs to get the runtime services regions from the first
kernel
3. As part of that call, it'll do
efi_memmap_init_late->__efi_memmap_init():
if (efi.memmap.flags & (EFI_MEMMAP_MEMBLOCK | EFI_MEMMAP_SLAB))
__efi_memmap_free(efi.memmap.phys_map,
and the memory which got allocated in step 1 is gone, thus reverting
what efi_arch_mem_reserve() is trying to fix.
IOW, we need a
EFI_MEMMAP_DO_NOT_TOUCH_MY_MEMORY
flag which'll stop this from happening. But I'd prefer it if Ard decides
what the right thing to do here is.
> another is skip efi_arch_mem_reserve when the EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME bit
> was set already.
Can that even happen?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists