From: Baoquan He <bhe-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Cc: linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
thgarnie-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
keescook-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org,
tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org,
mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,
bp-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org,
dyoung-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/mm/KASLR: Correct the upper boundary of KALSR mm regions if adjacent to EFI
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:31:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170315063142.GC1938@x1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170315061357.GB1938@x1>
On 03/15/17 at 02:13pm, Baoquan He wrote:
> PING!
>
> Is there any suggestion for this code bug fix?
>
> Boris added comment in patch 1/2 thread that it can also be fixed by
> swapping the naming - EFI_VA_START and EFI_VA_END. As he said the
> swapping can remove the confusion about the naming, while the con is
> changing it now could confuse more people who have the current
> mental picture of the mapping direction.
If swapping the naming is suggested, I can post v2 to change efi code.
Both of them is fine to me.
>
> And there's also a well known similar use case, stack, like stack_end
> naming in arch/x86/boot/main.c which is the low addr boundary of stack
> region.
>
> Any idea?
>
> Thanks
> Baoquan
>
> On 03/08/17 at 03:47pm, Baoquan He wrote:
> > EFI allocates runtime services regions top-down, starting from EFI_VA_START
> > to EFI_VA_END. So EFI_VA_START is bigger than EFI_VA_END and is the end of
> > EFI region. The upper boundary of memory regions randomized by KASLR should
> > be EFI_VA_END if it's adjacent to EFI region, but not EFI_VA_START.
> >
> > Correct it in this patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c b/arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c
> > index 887e571..aed2064 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c
> > @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ static const unsigned long vaddr_start = __PAGE_OFFSET_BASE;
> > #if defined(CONFIG_X86_ESPFIX64)
> > static const unsigned long vaddr_end = ESPFIX_BASE_ADDR;
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_EFI)
> > -static const unsigned long vaddr_end = EFI_VA_START;
> > +static const unsigned long vaddr_end = EFI_VA_END;
> > #else
> > static const unsigned long vaddr_end = __START_KERNEL_map;
> > #endif
> > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ void __init kernel_randomize_memory(void)
> > */
> > BUILD_BUG_ON(vaddr_start >= vaddr_end);
> > BUILD_BUG_ON(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_ESPFIX64) &&
> > - vaddr_end >= EFI_VA_START);
> > + vaddr_end >= EFI_VA_END);
> > BUILD_BUG_ON((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_ESPFIX64) ||
> > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI)) &&
> > vaddr_end >= __START_KERNEL_map);
> > --
> > 2.5.5
> >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, thgarnie@google.com,
keescook@chromium.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, bp@suse.de, dyoung@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/mm/KASLR: Correct the upper boundary of KALSR mm regions if adjacent to EFI
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:31:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170315063142.GC1938@x1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170315061357.GB1938@x1>
On 03/15/17 at 02:13pm, Baoquan He wrote:
> PING!
>
> Is there any suggestion for this code bug fix?
>
> Boris added comment in patch 1/2 thread that it can also be fixed by
> swapping the naming - EFI_VA_START and EFI_VA_END. As he said the
> swapping can remove the confusion about the naming, while the con is
> changing it now could confuse more people who have the current
> mental picture of the mapping direction.
If swapping the naming is suggested, I can post v2 to change efi code.
Both of them is fine to me.
>
> And there's also a well known similar use case, stack, like stack_end
> naming in arch/x86/boot/main.c which is the low addr boundary of stack
> region.
>
> Any idea?
>
> Thanks
> Baoquan
>
> On 03/08/17 at 03:47pm, Baoquan He wrote:
> > EFI allocates runtime services regions top-down, starting from EFI_VA_START
> > to EFI_VA_END. So EFI_VA_START is bigger than EFI_VA_END and is the end of
> > EFI region. The upper boundary of memory regions randomized by KASLR should
> > be EFI_VA_END if it's adjacent to EFI region, but not EFI_VA_START.
> >
> > Correct it in this patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c b/arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c
> > index 887e571..aed2064 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/kaslr.c
> > @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ static const unsigned long vaddr_start = __PAGE_OFFSET_BASE;
> > #if defined(CONFIG_X86_ESPFIX64)
> > static const unsigned long vaddr_end = ESPFIX_BASE_ADDR;
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_EFI)
> > -static const unsigned long vaddr_end = EFI_VA_START;
> > +static const unsigned long vaddr_end = EFI_VA_END;
> > #else
> > static const unsigned long vaddr_end = __START_KERNEL_map;
> > #endif
> > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ void __init kernel_randomize_memory(void)
> > */
> > BUILD_BUG_ON(vaddr_start >= vaddr_end);
> > BUILD_BUG_ON(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_ESPFIX64) &&
> > - vaddr_end >= EFI_VA_START);
> > + vaddr_end >= EFI_VA_END);
> > BUILD_BUG_ON((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_ESPFIX64) ||
> > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI)) &&
> > vaddr_end >= __START_KERNEL_map);
> > --
> > 2.5.5
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-15 6:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-08 7:47 [PATCH 1/2] x86/efi: Correct a tiny mistake in code comment Baoquan He
2017-03-08 7:47 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 8:18 ` Dave Young
[not found] ` <20170308081812.GA12600-0VdLhd/A9Pl+NNSt+8eSiB/sF2h8X+2i0E9HWUfgJXw@public.gmane.org>
2017-03-08 8:45 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 8:45 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 8:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-03-08 9:08 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-09 1:38 ` Dave Young
2017-03-08 9:00 ` Bhupesh Sharma
[not found] ` <CACi5LpOjxiiCEvdOHGxHj_c+G-W3HKHr8EgOURpZ-cb5XqQnNQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2017-03-08 9:09 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 9:09 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 9:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-03-08 9:35 ` Borislav Petkov
[not found] ` <20170308093555.yrhygjxx4mu562lp-fF5Pk5pvG8Y@public.gmane.org>
2017-03-08 10:17 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 10:17 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 10:50 ` Borislav Petkov
[not found] ` <20170308105047.pggc6hai3gplsbg2-fF5Pk5pvG8Y@public.gmane.org>
2017-03-09 0:48 ` Dave Young
2017-03-09 0:48 ` Dave Young
2017-03-08 20:05 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2017-03-08 20:05 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2017-03-08 9:45 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 9:45 ` Baoquan He
[not found] ` <1488959258-4731-1-git-send-email-bhe-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2017-03-08 7:47 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/mm/KASLR: Correct the upper boundary of KALSR mm regions if adjacent to EFI Baoquan He
2017-03-08 7:47 ` Baoquan He
[not found] ` <1488959258-4731-2-git-send-email-bhe-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2017-03-08 8:18 ` Dave Young
2017-03-08 8:18 ` Dave Young
[not found] ` <20170308081857.GB12600-0VdLhd/A9Pl+NNSt+8eSiB/sF2h8X+2i0E9HWUfgJXw@public.gmane.org>
2017-03-08 8:35 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2017-03-08 8:35 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2017-03-08 15:32 ` Thomas Garnier
2017-03-15 6:13 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-15 6:13 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-15 6:31 ` Baoquan He [this message]
2017-03-15 6:31 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-08 10:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/efi/64: Clean up code comment about efi region Baoquan He
2017-03-08 10:45 ` Baoquan He
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170315063142.GC1938@x1 \
--to=bhe-h+wxahxf7alqt0dzr+alfa@public.gmane.org \
--cc=bp-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org \
--cc=dyoung-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=keescook-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=thgarnie-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.