Re: [PATCH] [v2] arm64: efi: make sure vmlinux load address aligned on 2MB

[Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 01:12:36PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 01:08 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> 
> >arm64: efi: ensure kernel is loaded at correct address
> >
> >The kernel image needs to be loaded text_offset_bytes from a 2M-aligned
> >base, per Documentation/arm64/booting.txt. If loaded at the wrong offset
> >modulo 2M, __create_page_tables will create incorrect page tables.
> >
> >The EFI stub implicitly assumes that dram_base (i.e. the lowest address
> >with a EFI_MEMORY_WB attribute) is 2M-aligned, and tries to load the
> >kernel at dram_base + TEXT_OFFSET. If dram_base is not 2M-aligned, the
> >kernel will be loaded at the wrong offset from 2M.
> 
> Thanks, I'll use that.  I messed up a couple other things, so I need
> to send out a v3 anyway.
> 
> >>-		*image_addr = *reserve_addr = dram_base + TEXT_OFFSET;
> >>+		*image_addr = *reserve_addr =
> >>+			round_up(dram_base, SZ_2M) + TEXT_OFFSET;
> >
> >We also need to fix the test for whether we need to relocate the kernel:
> >(*image_addr != (dram_base + TEXT_OFFSET)).
> >
> >When dram_base is not 2M aligned, that is broken, and it's been broken
> >since it was introduced in commit 3c7f255039a2ad6e ("arm64: efi: add EFI
> >stub") in v3.16.
> >
> >It's a bit hideous to fix the general case, though, it seems.
> 
> Um, so I should I do something more in my v3 patch, or is this a
> change for a different patch?

I think there should be a single patch, but please hold off v3 for a day
or so. I think there a few more edge cases here, and I'm currently
investigating.

Thanks,
Mark.