From: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, will@kernel.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: efi: Execute runtime services from a dedicated stack
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2023 14:42:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y7WQVreh3l9hYarK@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXEYDHuRmUPvdMVj1H1fLoOKcr+qG6NDpufxwJa57jsWdg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 04 Jan 2023, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 at 11:40, Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 05 Dec 2022, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >
> > > With the introduction of PRMT in the ACPI subsystem, the EFI rts
> > > workqueue is no longer the only caller of efi_call_virt_pointer() in the
> > > kernel. This means the EFI runtime services lock is no longer sufficient
> > > to manage concurrent calls into firmware, but also that firmware calls
> > > may occur that are not marshalled via the workqueue mechanism, but
> > > originate directly from the caller context.
> > >
> > > For added robustness, and to ensure that the runtime services have 8 KiB
> > > of stack space available as per the EFI spec, introduce a spinlock
> > > protected EFI runtime stack of 8 KiB, where the spinlock also ensures
> > > serialization between the EFI rts workqueue (which itself serializes EFI
> > > runtime calls) and other callers of efi_call_virt_pointer().
> > >
> > > While at it, use the stack pivot to avoid reloading the shadow call
> > > stack pointer from the ordinary stack, as doing so could produce a
> > > gadget to defeat it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h | 3 +++
> > > arch/arm64/kernel/efi-rt-wrapper.S | 13 +++++++++-
> > > arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Could we have this in Stable please?
> >
> > Upstream commit: ff7a167961d1b ("arm64: efi: Execute runtime services from a dedicated stack")
> >
> > Ard, do we need Patch 2 as well, or can this be applied on its own?
> >
>
> Thanks for the reminder.
>
> Only patch #1 is needed. It should be applied to v5.10 and later.
Perfect, thanks Ard.
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, will@kernel.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: efi: Execute runtime services from a dedicated stack
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2023 14:42:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y7WQVreh3l9hYarK@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXEYDHuRmUPvdMVj1H1fLoOKcr+qG6NDpufxwJa57jsWdg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 04 Jan 2023, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 at 11:40, Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 05 Dec 2022, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >
> > > With the introduction of PRMT in the ACPI subsystem, the EFI rts
> > > workqueue is no longer the only caller of efi_call_virt_pointer() in the
> > > kernel. This means the EFI runtime services lock is no longer sufficient
> > > to manage concurrent calls into firmware, but also that firmware calls
> > > may occur that are not marshalled via the workqueue mechanism, but
> > > originate directly from the caller context.
> > >
> > > For added robustness, and to ensure that the runtime services have 8 KiB
> > > of stack space available as per the EFI spec, introduce a spinlock
> > > protected EFI runtime stack of 8 KiB, where the spinlock also ensures
> > > serialization between the EFI rts workqueue (which itself serializes EFI
> > > runtime calls) and other callers of efi_call_virt_pointer().
> > >
> > > While at it, use the stack pivot to avoid reloading the shadow call
> > > stack pointer from the ordinary stack, as doing so could produce a
> > > gadget to defeat it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h | 3 +++
> > > arch/arm64/kernel/efi-rt-wrapper.S | 13 +++++++++-
> > > arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Could we have this in Stable please?
> >
> > Upstream commit: ff7a167961d1b ("arm64: efi: Execute runtime services from a dedicated stack")
> >
> > Ard, do we need Patch 2 as well, or can this be applied on its own?
> >
>
> Thanks for the reminder.
>
> Only patch #1 is needed. It should be applied to v5.10 and later.
Perfect, thanks Ard.
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-04 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-05 20:12 [PATCH 0/2] arm64: efi: Robustify EFI runtime wrapper code Ard Biesheuvel
2022-12-05 20:12 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-12-05 20:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64: efi: Execute runtime services from a dedicated stack Ard Biesheuvel
2022-12-05 20:12 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-12-09 10:51 ` Mark Rutland
2022-12-09 10:51 ` Mark Rutland
2022-12-09 10:53 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-12-09 10:53 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-01-04 10:40 ` Lee Jones
2023-01-04 10:40 ` Lee Jones
2023-01-04 13:56 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-01-04 13:56 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-01-04 14:42 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2023-01-04 14:42 ` Lee Jones
2023-01-04 14:52 ` Greg KH
2023-01-04 14:52 ` Greg KH
2023-01-04 16:13 ` Mark Rutland
2023-01-04 16:13 ` Mark Rutland
2023-01-04 16:15 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-01-04 16:15 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-01-04 16:30 ` Mark Rutland
2023-01-04 16:30 ` Mark Rutland
2023-01-04 16:32 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-01-04 16:32 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-01-05 11:13 ` Greg KH
2023-01-05 11:13 ` Greg KH
2023-01-17 16:56 ` Lee Jones
2023-01-17 16:56 ` Lee Jones
2023-01-22 13:48 ` Greg KH
2023-01-22 13:48 ` Greg KH
2025-03-09 10:14 ` SDL
2023-01-05 12:56 ` Mark Rutland
2023-01-05 12:56 ` Mark Rutland
2023-01-05 13:37 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-01-05 13:37 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-12-05 20:12 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: efi: Recover from synchronous exceptions occurring in firmware Ard Biesheuvel
2022-12-05 20:12 ` Ard Biesheuvel
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=Y7WQVreh3l9hYarK@google.com \
--to=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=stable@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.