From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: efi: correctly align vaddr for runtime maps
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 18:17:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151119181724.GC15231@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu9OoRmV5hDsN9MrnKEVV85EFPpN_tW7S1WoFMxNxoY73Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 07:08:53PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 19 November 2015 at 18:37, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > The kernel may use a page granularity of 4K, 16K, or 64K depending on
> > configuration.
> >
> > When mapping EFI runtime regions, we use memrange_efi_to_native to round
> > the physical base address of a region down to a granule-aligned
> > boundary, and round the size up to a granule-aligned boundary. However,
> > we fail to similarly round the virtual base address down to a
> > granule-aligned boundary.
> >
>
> Actually, __create_mapping() (which is called by create_pgd_mapping())
> does the following
>
> """
> static void __create_mapping(struct mm_struct *mm, pgd_t *pgd,
> phys_addr_t phys, unsigned long virt,
> phys_addr_t size, pgprot_t prot,
> void *(*alloc)(unsigned long size))
> {
> unsigned long addr, length, end, next;
>
> addr = virt & PAGE_MASK;
> length = PAGE_ALIGN(size + (virt & ~PAGE_MASK));
> """
>
> so it does the rounding of the virtual address for us, but we are
> rounding up the length twice.
> I'd rather simply get rid of memrange_efi_to_native() instead, as it
> is obviously redundant.
We'd have to have our own conversion from EFI page size to kernel page
size, but otherwise that would be fine, yes.
I'll spin a v2 to that effect.
> > The virtual base address may be up to PAGE_SIZE - 4K above what it
> > should be, and in create_pgd_mapping, we may erroneously map an
> > additional page at the end of any region which does not have a
> > granule-aligned virtual base address.
> >
> > Depending on the memory map, this page may be in a region we are not
> > intended/permitted to map, or may clash with a different region that we
> > wich to map.
> >
> > Prevent this issue by rounding the virtual base address down to the
> > kernel page granularity, matching what we do for the physical base
> > address.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > Cc: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c | 6 ++++--
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > I spotted this by playing with Will's break-before-make checker [1], which
> > detected an erroneously created PTE being overwritten with a different output
> > address.
> >
> > It looks like the VA bug was introduced in commit f3cdfd239da56a4c ("arm64/efi:
> > move SetVirtualAddressMap() to UEFI stub").
> >
> > Prior to commit 60305db9884515ca ("arm64/efi: move virtmap init to early
> > initcall") so manual fixup is required, but the logic fix is the same.
> >
>
> I don't follow
Prior to f3cdfd239da56a4c we didn't align the PA and VA separately, so
we didn't have this bug.
In 60305db9884515ca we moved the code around a bit, so the patch won't
apply, but the diff is practically identical.
When running with Will's patch, I spotted the bug due to the additional
page clashing with the mapping created for an adjacent region.
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-19 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-19 17:37 [PATCH] arm64: efi: correctly align vaddr for runtime maps Mark Rutland
2015-11-19 18:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-11-19 18:17 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2015-11-19 18:29 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-11-19 18:32 ` Mark Rutland
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=20151119181724.GC15231@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).