From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jlee@suse.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] efi: print appropriate status message when loading certificates Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 01:40:26 +0800 Message-ID: <20190329174026.GB3701@localhost> References: <20190324002621.3551-1-jlee@suse.com> <20190324002621.3551-2-jlee@suse.com> <1553714635.4608.34.camel@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1553714635.4608.34.camel@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mimi Zohar Cc: "Lee, Chun-Yi" , Ard Biesheuvel , James Morris , "Serge E . Hallyn" , David Howells , Josh Boyer , Nayna Jain , linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 03:23:55PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Sun, 2019-03-24 at 08:26 +0800, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote: > > When loading certificates list from UEFI variable, the original error > > message direct shows the efi status code from UEFI firmware. It looks > > ugly: > > > > [ 2.335031] Couldn't get size: 0x800000000000000e > > [ 2.335032] Couldn't get UEFI MokListRT > > [ 2.339985] Couldn't get size: 0x800000000000000e > > [ 2.339987] Couldn't get UEFI dbx list > > > > So, this patch shows the status string instead of status code. > > > > On the other hand, the "Couldn't get UEFI" message doesn't need > > to be exposed when db/dbx/mok variable do not exist. So, this > > patch set the message level to debug. > > > > v2. > > Setting the MODSIGN messagse level to debug. > > > > Link: https://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/535324-MODSIGN-Couldn-t-get-UEFI-db-list?p=2897516#post2897516 > > Cc: James Morris > > Cc: Serge E. Hallyn" > > Cc: David Howells > > Cc: Nayna Jain > > Cc: Josh Boyer > > Cc: Mimi Zohar > > Signed-off-by: "Lee, Chun-Yi" > > --- > > security/integrity/platform_certs/load_uefi.c | 13 ++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/security/integrity/platform_certs/load_uefi.c b/security/integrity/platform_certs/load_uefi.c > > index 81b19c52832b..e65244b31f04 100644 > > --- a/security/integrity/platform_certs/load_uefi.c > > +++ b/security/integrity/platform_certs/load_uefi.c > > @@ -48,7 +48,9 @@ static __init void *get_cert_list(efi_char16_t *name, efi_guid_t *guid, > > > > status = efi.get_variable(name, guid, NULL, &lsize, &tmpdb); > > if (status != EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL) { > > - pr_err("Couldn't get size: 0x%lx\n", status); > > + if (status != EFI_NOT_FOUND) > > + pr_err("Couldn't get size: %s\n", > > + efi_status_to_str(status)); > > return NULL; > > } > > > > @@ -59,7 +61,8 @@ static __init void *get_cert_list(efi_char16_t *name, efi_guid_t *guid, > > status = efi.get_variable(name, guid, NULL, &lsize, db); > > if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) { > > kfree(db); > > - pr_err("Error reading db var: 0x%lx\n", status); > > + pr_err("Error reading db var: %s\n", > > + efi_status_to_str(status)); > > return NULL; > > } > > > > @@ -155,7 +158,7 @@ static int __init load_uefi_certs(void) > > if (!uefi_check_ignore_db()) { > > db = get_cert_list(L"db", &secure_var, &dbsize); > > if (!db) { > > - pr_err("MODSIGN: Couldn't get UEFI db list\n"); > > + pr_debug("MODSIGN: Couldn't get UEFI db list\n"); > > Sure, this is fine. > > > } else { > > rc = parse_efi_signature_list("UEFI:db", > > db, dbsize, get_handler_for_db); > > @@ -168,7 +171,7 @@ static int __init load_uefi_certs(void) > > > > mok = get_cert_list(L"MokListRT", &mok_var, &moksize); > > if (!mok) { > > - pr_info("Couldn't get UEFI MokListRT\n"); > > + pr_debug("Couldn't get UEFI MokListRT\n"); > > This is fine too. > > > } else { > > rc = parse_efi_signature_list("UEFI:MokListRT", > > mok, moksize, get_handler_for_db); > > @@ -179,7 +182,7 @@ static int __init load_uefi_certs(void) > > > > dbx = get_cert_list(L"dbx", &secure_var, &dbxsize); > > if (!dbx) { > > - pr_info("Couldn't get UEFI dbx list\n"); > > + pr_debug("Couldn't get UEFI dbx list\n"); > > If there isn't a db or moklist, then this is fine.  My concern is not > having an indication that the dbx wasn't installed, when it should > have been. > > Perhaps similar to the "Loading compiled-in X.509 certificates" > informational message there should informational messages for db, mok, > and dbx as well. > OK. I will add message when kernel found db, dbx and mok. It will just like the informaton message for ACPI S0,S3,S4 support. Thanks Joey Lee