From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3093942AB7 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2025 02:04:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762394651; cv=none; b=jdNIoZxuWvhDHnqKbZEnOKsRNtHGe7SZXZ3e36kB2sWeYUYb25oLc0WDowkTpBUDPsun33ZLV+wL6wWCGbcR7XMc92WcmGntot9CqDrInUNCjJOwQUCdeXjHriyG48pwfBqdBGUAgUQNt5TVgguXVegpMpEQ+Lm4hCRpbjwOXk8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762394651; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MxFRIijbwwwqY7jae0mw/rt0oQh7LPw0Oxbj80saWag=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=QBAj8HJWO58MiXrfSuCcZNGD4YkcgkKvqoWP9N1PfkJ4qnU/HvHkI111yjF/4yOGPIGK8HLkS8M/rLPwovK54GIh9zwApcYnN0ty1QmOqUVGBY17CszNbdXZtVygqN05bNXZ7zvLkv/oBryFYe+dLEnmRB7nK+C35QE4KpBmPsk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=LPb0dlsU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="LPb0dlsU" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1762394648; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bi1oZ9b9KICH6yCndcUItjcgOah5Ou2mXDzArlJhWmw=; b=LPb0dlsUGnu/0swv5KvptCz3sM8idj2bTMlIAjS7rzhUURLC2+JH+qg+kleVom1JwoAr6X 7eLH08E8GvmRwaJDbJlueL41HRuviyTxxzN6VRIXYF2EatWC+ICdBK6LyCzGqpKFTiGwst OW74eASYdhwa7azpBpK3GA+pDx5C5+E= Received: from mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-589-fwnul_InMrG02t2eV_gtaQ-1; Wed, 05 Nov 2025 21:04:04 -0500 X-MC-Unique: fwnul_InMrG02t2eV_gtaQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: fwnul_InMrG02t2eV_gtaQ_1762394643 Received: from mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5BDE19560A2; Thu, 6 Nov 2025 02:04:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.72.112.190]) by mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D1E81956095; Thu, 6 Nov 2025 02:04:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2025 10:03:56 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: Pingfan Liu Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Mimi Zohar , Roberto Sassu , Alexander Graf , Steven Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] kernel/kexec: Fix IMA when allocation happens in CMA area Message-ID: References: <20251105130922.13321-1-piliu@redhat.com> <20251105130922.13321-2-piliu@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20251105130922.13321-2-piliu@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.17 Hi Pingfan, On 11/05/25 at 09:09pm, Pingfan Liu wrote: > When I tested kexec with the latest kernel, I ran into the following warning: > > [ 40.712410] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 40.712576] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 1562 at kernel/kexec_core.c:1001 kimage_map_segment+0x144/0x198 > [...] > [ 40.816047] Call trace: > [ 40.818498] kimage_map_segment+0x144/0x198 (P) > [ 40.823221] ima_kexec_post_load+0x58/0xc0 > [ 40.827246] __do_sys_kexec_file_load+0x29c/0x368 > [...] > [ 40.855423] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- > > This is caused by the fact that kexec allocates the destination directly > in the CMA area. In that case, the CMA kernel address should be exported > directly to the IMA component, instead of using the vmalloc'd address. > > Signed-off-by: Pingfan Liu > Cc: Andrew Morton > Cc: Baoquan He > Cc: Alexander Graf > Cc: Steven Chen > Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org > To: kexec@lists.infradead.org > --- > kernel/kexec_core.c | 7 ++++++- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/kexec_core.c b/kernel/kexec_core.c > index 9a1966207041..abe40286a02c 100644 > --- a/kernel/kexec_core.c > +++ b/kernel/kexec_core.c > @@ -967,6 +967,7 @@ void *kimage_map_segment(struct kimage *image, int idx) > kimage_entry_t *ptr, entry; > struct page **src_pages; > unsigned int npages; > + struct page *cma; > void *vaddr = NULL; > int i; > > @@ -974,6 +975,9 @@ void *kimage_map_segment(struct kimage *image, int idx) > size = image->segment[idx].memsz; > eaddr = addr + size; > > + cma = image->segment_cma[idx]; Thanks for your fix. But I totally can't get what you are doing. The idx passed into kimage_map_segment() could index image->segment[], and can index image->segment_cma[], could you reconsider and make the code more reasonable? > + if (cma) > + return cma; > /* > * Collect the source pages and map them in a contiguous VA range. > */ > @@ -1014,7 +1018,8 @@ void *kimage_map_segment(struct kimage *image, int idx) > > void kimage_unmap_segment(void *segment_buffer) > { > - vunmap(segment_buffer); > + if (is_vmalloc_addr(segment_buffer)) > + vunmap(segment_buffer); > } > > struct kexec_load_limit { > -- > 2.49.0 >