linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/2] efi/memattr: Use desc_size instead of total size to check for corruption

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]

Message-ID: <CALu+AoS5_w2CV5w+b1WrFRFH7nfwmkLZUh=AXn=D=7rAhDNVAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 13:36:40 +0800
From: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, devel@...2.groups.io, 
	kexec@...ts.infradead.org, hannes@...xchg.org, x86@...nel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, leitao@...ian.org, gourry@...rry.net, 
	kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] efi/memattr: Use desc_size instead of total size to
 check for corruption

Hi,
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 19:48, Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 20/01/2025 11:29, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 11:50, Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 20/01/2025 10:32, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 11:27, Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> ...
> >>>> Hi Ard,
> >>>>
> >>>> Just wanted to check how should we proceed forward? Should we try and fix the warning
> >>>> and corruption during kexec as done in this series or not initialize memory attributes
> >>>> table at all in kexec boot? I would prefer fixing the issues as in this series.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I would prefer kexec boot on x86 to disregard the memory attributes
> >>> table entirely.
> >>
> >> Would you like Dave to send something like
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/CALu+AoS8tb=HgaybDw5OG4A1QbOXHvuidpu0ynmz-nE1nBqzTA@mail.gmail.com/
> >> on the mailing list (wrapped in ifdef CONFIG_X86_64)
> >>
> >
> > I prefer this approach. and no need for the ifdef, this is x86
> > specific code, and the memory attributes table is already ignored
> > entirely on 32-bit x86 iirc
>
> ah yes, I ignored the file name when reviewing it and just focused on the function :)
>
> Will wait for Dave to send it.

Ok,  I will add reported-by from you and suggested-by from Ard.  But I
can not test the efi mem attr, I'd prefer to have your test results
first.  Could you confirm that?

Thanks
Dave