From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
Matt Fleming
<matt-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: efi: ignore EFI_MEMORY_XP attribute if RP and/or WP are set
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:53:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170915185355.GC3349@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170914193153.18520-1-ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
On 09/14, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> The UEFI memory map is a bit vague about how to interpret the
> EFI_MEMORY_XP attribute when it is combined with EFI_MEMORY_RP and/or
> EFI_MEMORY_WP, which have retroactively been redefined as cacheability
> attributes rather than permission attributes.
>
> So let's ignore EFI_MEMORY_XP if _RP and/or _WP are also set. In this
> case, it is likely that they are being used to describe the capability
> of the region (i.e., whether it has the controls to reconfigure it as
> non-executable) rather than the nature of the contents of the region
> (i.e., whether it contains data that we will never attempt to execute)
>
> Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
Reported-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
I will test early next week and provide a tested-by. Thanks.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: efi: ignore EFI_MEMORY_XP attribute if RP and/or WP are set
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:53:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170915185355.GC3349@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170914193153.18520-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
On 09/14, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> The UEFI memory map is a bit vague about how to interpret the
> EFI_MEMORY_XP attribute when it is combined with EFI_MEMORY_RP and/or
> EFI_MEMORY_WP, which have retroactively been redefined as cacheability
> attributes rather than permission attributes.
>
> So let's ignore EFI_MEMORY_XP if _RP and/or _WP are also set. In this
> case, it is likely that they are being used to describe the capability
> of the region (i.e., whether it has the controls to reconfigure it as
> non-executable) rather than the nature of the contents of the region
> (i.e., whether it contains data that we will never attempt to execute)
>
> Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Reported-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
I will test early next week and provide a tested-by. Thanks.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-15 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-14 19:31 [PATCH] arm64: efi: ignore EFI_MEMORY_XP attribute if RP and/or WP are set Ard Biesheuvel
2017-09-14 19:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
[not found] ` <20170914193153.18520-1-ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2017-09-14 19:33 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-09-14 19:33 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-09-15 18:53 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2017-09-15 18:53 ` Stephen Boyd
[not found] ` <20170915185355.GC3349-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
2017-09-15 22:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-09-15 22:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
[not found] ` <CAKv+Gu_YEZAZL7X5oE9nPnoYi31xsrktLoik8_Gt442AsaLhWQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2017-09-22 21:57 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-09-22 21:57 ` Stephen Boyd
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=20170915185355.GC3349@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd-sgv2jx0feol9jmxxk+q4oq@public.gmane.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=matt-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@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.