From: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
ebiederm@xmission.com, noodles@fb.com, bauermann@kolabnow.com,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: code@tyhicks.com, nramas@linux.microsoft.com, paul@paul-moore.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] ima: refactor ima_dump_measurement_list to move memory allocation to a separate function
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 14:31:39 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc666310-164f-487e-8dde-d3a1a3c70a5a@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1aa5524b52fdb46df4948a21b1139cf833758cde.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Thanks a lot for reviewing this patch set Mimi.
On 10/26/23 13:16, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Hi Tushar,
>
> According to Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst, the subject
> line should be between 70-75 characters.
>
> Perhaps something like "ima: define and call ima_alloc_kexec_buffer()".
>
Sure thing. I will shorten the subject line. Here and elsewhere.
> On Thu, 2023-10-05 at 11:25 -0700, Tushar Sugandhi wrote:
>> IMA allocates memory and dumps the measurement during kexec soft reboot
>> as a single function call ima_dump_measurement_list(). It gets called
>> during kexec 'load' operation. It results in the IMA measurements
>> between the window of kexec 'load' and 'execute' getting dropped when the
>> system boots into the new Kernel. One of the kexec requirements is the
>> segment size cannot change between the 'load' and the 'execute'.
>> Therefore, to address this problem, ima_dump_measurement_list() needs
>> to be refactored to allocate the memory at kexec 'load', and dump the
>> measurements at kexec 'execute'. The function that allocates the memory
>> should handle the scenario where the kexec load is called multiple times
>
> The above pragraph is unnecessary.
>
Sounds good. I will remove the above paragraph.
>> Refactor ima_dump_measurement_list() to move the memory allocation part
>> to a separate function ima_alloc_kexec_buf() to allocate buffer of size
>> 'kexec_segment_size' at kexec 'load'. Make the local variables in
>> function ima_dump_measurement_list() global, so that they can be accessed
>> from ima_alloc_kexec_buf(). Make necessary changes to the function
>> ima_add_kexec_buffer() to call the above two functions.
>
> Fix the wording based on the suggested changes below.
>
Will do.
>> Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com>
>
> Before re-posting this patch set, verify there aren't any
> "checkpatch.pl --strict" issues.
> After applying each patch, compile the kernel and verify it still
> works.
> >> ---
>> security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c | 126 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
>> 1 file changed, 93 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>> index 419dc405c831..307e07991865 100644
>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>> @@ -15,61 +15,114 @@
>> #include "ima.h"
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_IMA_KEXEC
>> +struct seq_file ima_kexec_file;
>
> Define "ima_kexec_file" as static since it only used in this file.
> Since the variable does not need to be global, is there still a reason
> for changing its name? Minimize code change.
>
>> +struct ima_kexec_hdr ima_khdr;
>> +
>> +void ima_clear_kexec_file(void)
>
> The opposite of "set" is "clear" (e.g. set_git, clear_bit). The
> opposite of "alloc" would be "free" (e.g. ima_alloc_kexec_buf,
> ima_free_kexec_buf)
>
Agreed. Will make it ima_free_kexec_buf.
>> +{
>> + vfree(ima_kexec_file.buf);
>> + ima_kexec_file.buf = NULL;
>> + ima_kexec_file.size = 0;
>> + ima_kexec_file.read_pos = 0;
>> + ima_kexec_file.count = 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int ima_alloc_kexec_buf(size_t kexec_segment_size)
>> +{
>> + if ((kexec_segment_size == 0) ||
>> + (kexec_segment_size == ULONG_MAX) ||
>> + ((kexec_segment_size >> PAGE_SHIFT) > totalram_pages() / 2)) {
>> + pr_err("%s: Invalid segment size for kexec: %zu\n",
>> + __func__, kexec_segment_size);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>
> Please avoid code duplication. If moving the test here, then remove it
> from its original place.
>
Sure. Will do.
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * If kexec load was called before, clear the existing buffer
>> + * before allocating a new one
>> + */
>
>> + if (ima_kexec_file.buf)
>> + ima_clear_kexec_file();
>
> Perhaps instead of always freeing the buffer, check and see whether the
> size has changed. If it hasn't changed, then simply return. If it has
> changed, perhaps use realloc(). Possible wording:
>
> "Kexec may be called multiple times. Free and re-alloc the buffer if
> the size changed."
>
That's a good optimization. Thanks for the suggestion. Will do.
>> +
>> + /* segment size can't change between kexec load and execute */
>> + ima_kexec_file.buf = vmalloc(kexec_segment_size);
>> + if (!ima_kexec_file.buf) {
>> + pr_err("%s: No memory for ima kexec measurement buffer\n",
>> + __func__);
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ima_kexec_file.size = kexec_segment_size;
>> + ima_kexec_file.read_pos = 0;
>> + ima_kexec_file.count = sizeof(ima_khdr); /* reserved space */
>> +
>> + memset(&ima_khdr, 0, sizeof(ima_khdr));
>> + ima_khdr.version = 1;
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static int ima_dump_measurement_list(unsigned long *buffer_size, void **buffer,
>> unsigned long segment_size)
>> {
>> struct ima_queue_entry *qe;
>> - struct seq_file file;
>> - struct ima_kexec_hdr khdr;
>> int ret = 0;
>>
>> - /* segment size can't change between kexec load and execute */
>> - file.buf = vmalloc(segment_size);
>> - if (!file.buf) {
>> - ret = -ENOMEM;
>> - goto out;
>> + if (!ima_kexec_file.buf) {
>> + pr_err("%s: Kexec file buf not allocated\n",
>> + __func__);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> }
>>
>> - file.size = segment_size;
>> - file.read_pos = 0;
>> - file.count = sizeof(khdr); /* reserved space */
>> + /*
>> + * Ensure the kexec buffer is large enough to hold ima_khdr
>> + */
>> + if (ima_kexec_file.size < sizeof(ima_khdr)) {
>> + pr_err("%s: Kexec buffer size too low to hold ima_khdr\n",
>> + __func__);
>> + ima_clear_kexec_file();
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> + }
>
> Is this necessary?
>
Yeh. It's an overkill. Will remove.
>> - memset(&khdr, 0, sizeof(khdr));
>> - khdr.version = 1;
>> + /*
>> + * If we reach here, then there is enough memory
>> + * of size kexec_segment_size in ima_kexec_file.buf
>> + * to copy at least partial IMA log.
>> + * Make best effort to copy as many IMA measurements
>> + * as possible.
>> + */
>
> Suggestion:
>
> /* Copy as many IMA measurements list records as possible */
>
That's a much cleaner comment. Will update.
~Tushar
>> list_for_each_entry_rcu(qe, &ima_measurements, later) {
>> - if (file.count < file.size) {
>> - khdr.count++;
>> - ima_measurements_show(&file, qe);
>> + if (ima_kexec_file.count < ima_kexec_file.size) {
>> + ima_khdr.count++;
>> + ima_measurements_show(&ima_kexec_file, qe);
>> } else {
>> - ret = -EINVAL;
>> + ret = EFBIG;
>> + pr_err("%s: IMA log file is too big for Kexec buf\n",
>> + __func__);
>> break;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> - if (ret < 0)
>> - goto out;
>> -
>> /*
>> * fill in reserved space with some buffer details
>> * (eg. version, buffer size, number of measurements)
>> */
>> - khdr.buffer_size = file.count;
>> + ima_khdr.buffer_size = ima_kexec_file.count;
>> if (ima_canonical_fmt) {
>> - khdr.version = cpu_to_le16(khdr.version);
>> - khdr.count = cpu_to_le64(khdr.count);
>> - khdr.buffer_size = cpu_to_le64(khdr.buffer_size);
>> + ima_khdr.version = cpu_to_le16(ima_khdr.version);
>> + ima_khdr.count = cpu_to_le64(ima_khdr.count);
>> + ima_khdr.buffer_size = cpu_to_le64(ima_khdr.buffer_size);
>> }
>> - memcpy(file.buf, &khdr, sizeof(khdr));
>> + memcpy(ima_kexec_file.buf, &ima_khdr, sizeof(ima_khdr));
>>
>> print_hex_dump_debug("ima dump: ", DUMP_PREFIX_NONE, 16, 1,
>> - file.buf, file.count < 100 ? file.count : 100,
>> + ima_kexec_file.buf, ima_kexec_file.count < 100 ?
>> + ima_kexec_file.count : 100,
>> true);
>>
>> - *buffer_size = file.count;
>> - *buffer = file.buf;
>> -out:
>> - if (ret == -EINVAL)
>> - vfree(file.buf);
>> + *buffer_size = ima_kexec_file.count;
>> + *buffer = ima_kexec_file.buf;
>> +
>> return ret;
>> }
>
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-14 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-05 18:25 [PATCH v2 0/7] ima: kexec: measure events between kexec load and execute Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-05 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] ima: refactor ima_dump_measurement_list to move memory allocation to a separate function Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-13 0:28 ` Stefan Berger
2023-10-20 20:33 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-20 21:21 ` Stefan Berger
2023-10-20 21:50 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-26 20:16 ` Mimi Zohar
2023-10-27 3:25 ` Mimi Zohar
2023-11-14 22:32 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-11-14 22:31 ` Tushar Sugandhi [this message]
2023-10-05 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] ima: move ima_dump_measurement_list call from kexec load to execute Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-13 0:28 ` Stefan Berger
2023-10-20 20:35 ` Tushar Sugandhi
[not found] ` <989af3e9a8621f57643b67b717d9a39fdb2ffe24.camel@linux.ibm.com>
2023-11-14 22:43 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-11-15 22:30 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-05 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] ima: kexec: map source pages containing IMA buffer to image post kexec load Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-13 0:29 ` Stefan Berger
2023-10-20 20:36 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-05 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] kexec: update kexec_file_load syscall to call ima_kexec_post_load Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-05 18:26 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] ima: suspend measurements while the buffer is being copied during kexec reboot Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-05 18:26 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] ima: make the memory for events between kexec load and exec configurable Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-13 0:27 ` Stefan Berger
2023-10-20 20:39 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-20 21:16 ` Stefan Berger
2023-10-20 21:53 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-05 18:26 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] ima: record log size at kexec load and execute Tushar Sugandhi
2023-10-13 0:27 ` Stefan Berger
2023-10-20 20:40 ` Tushar Sugandhi
[not found] ` <2b95e8b9ebe10a24c7cb6fc90cb2d1342a157ed5.camel@linux.ibm.com>
2023-11-14 22:48 ` Tushar Sugandhi
[not found] ` <8f87e7e4fe5c5a24cdc0d3e2267eeaf00825d1bb.camel@linux.ibm.com>
2023-10-27 19:51 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] ima: kexec: measure events between " Mimi Zohar
2023-11-15 19:21 ` Tushar Sugandhi
2023-11-14 23:24 ` Tushar Sugandhi
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=fc666310-164f-487e-8dde-d3a1a3c70a5a@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=bauermann@kolabnow.com \
--cc=code@tyhicks.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=noodles@fb.com \
--cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox