All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Possible BUG] arm64: efi: efi_runtime_fixup_exception() and efi_call_virt_check_flags() both taint the kernel
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 10:08:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2t8Njke376KjHpz@monolith.localdoman> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXGswMfSXYmr=LyAOusYjq6eLqC9oPRRCEaR-1u-kFu4Hw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 10:07:00AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 11:10, Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> ...
> >
> > Speaking as an user, I think it would be nice to revert the commit, that's
> > how I am running v6.1-rcX kernels on the machine, as updating the firmware
> > is not feasible right now. But I realize that I'm not the one maintaining
> > the code, so I don't have a strong opinion about it :) And it's better now
> > than it was at rc3, when the kernel was panicing.
> >
> 
> I sent out a patch yesterday that tweaks the sync exception fixup
> handler to only disable the runtime service that triggered the
> exception. This means, of course, that you might hit it multiple times
> if several runtime service implementations are buggy, but there are
> only five or so that we actually use, so that shouldn't make a huge
> difference. But it also means a) we don't trigger other code paths
> that freak out when a runtime service that was available suddenly goes
> away and b) the diagnostics are more useful because we will find out
> which other runtime services are broken.
> 
> Could you please test that patch? And for good measure, could you try
> something like
> 
> efibootmgr -t 3
> 
> (as root) to exercise the SetVariable() path as well?

Tried booting with the patch applied yesterday, no regression as far as I
could tell (still hitting the two add_taint() statements, but that's not
what the patch does).

I was trying to figure out how I could test that the other runtime services
are still working correctly, your suggestion is exactly what I was looking
for, thanks. The machine is a shared machine, will test when I get access
to it (hopefully later today) and post my findings.

Thanks,
Alex

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Possible BUG] arm64: efi: efi_runtime_fixup_exception() and efi_call_virt_check_flags() both taint the kernel
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 10:08:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2t8Njke376KjHpz@monolith.localdoman> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXGswMfSXYmr=LyAOusYjq6eLqC9oPRRCEaR-1u-kFu4Hw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 10:07:00AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 11:10, Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> ...
> >
> > Speaking as an user, I think it would be nice to revert the commit, that's
> > how I am running v6.1-rcX kernels on the machine, as updating the firmware
> > is not feasible right now. But I realize that I'm not the one maintaining
> > the code, so I don't have a strong opinion about it :) And it's better now
> > than it was at rc3, when the kernel was panicing.
> >
> 
> I sent out a patch yesterday that tweaks the sync exception fixup
> handler to only disable the runtime service that triggered the
> exception. This means, of course, that you might hit it multiple times
> if several runtime service implementations are buggy, but there are
> only five or so that we actually use, so that shouldn't make a huge
> difference. But it also means a) we don't trigger other code paths
> that freak out when a runtime service that was available suddenly goes
> away and b) the diagnostics are more useful because we will find out
> which other runtime services are broken.
> 
> Could you please test that patch? And for good measure, could you try
> something like
> 
> efibootmgr -t 3
> 
> (as root) to exercise the SetVariable() path as well?

Tried booting with the patch applied yesterday, no regression as far as I
could tell (still hitting the two add_taint() statements, but that's not
what the patch does).

I was trying to figure out how I could test that the other runtime services
are still working correctly, your suggestion is exactly what I was looking
for, thanks. The machine is a shared machine, will test when I get access
to it (hopefully later today) and post my findings.

Thanks,
Alex

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-09 10:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-07 17:27 [Possible BUG] arm64: efi: efi_runtime_fixup_exception() and efi_call_virt_check_flags() both taint the kernel Alexandru Elisei
2022-11-07 17:27 ` Alexandru Elisei
2022-11-07 17:47 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-11-07 17:47   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-11-08 10:09   ` Alexandru Elisei
2022-11-08 10:09     ` Alexandru Elisei
2022-11-09  9:07     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-11-09  9:07       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-11-09 10:08       ` Alexandru Elisei [this message]
2022-11-09 10:08         ` Alexandru Elisei
2022-11-08 12:19 ` [Possible BUG] arm64: efi: efi_runtime_fixup_exception() and efi_call_virt_check_flags() both taint the kernel #forregzbot Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-11-08 12:19   ` Thorsten Leemhuis

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=Y2t8Njke376KjHpz@monolith.localdoman \
    --to=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.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.