From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sam@mendozajonas.com>
Received: from mendozajonas.com (mendozajonas.com [188.166.185.233])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3s89MX1jQ4zDqJ5
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:23:52 +1000 (AEST)
Message-ID: <1470784396.2301.2.camel@mendozajonas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] ima: on soft reboot, restore the measurement list
From: Samuel Mendoza-Jonas <sam@mendozajonas.com>
To: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mimi Zohar
 <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:13:16 +1000
In-Reply-To: <3544655.o5QPxko4Ba@hactar>
References: <1470313475-20090-1-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <87wpjqtdg8.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
 <1470747673.2881.118.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <3544655.o5QPxko4Ba@hactar>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 10:19 -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 09 August 2016, 09:01:13 schrieb Mimi Zohar:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 20:59 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > 
> > > Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> > > > b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> > > > index b5728da..84e8d36 100644
> > > > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> > > > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> > > > @@ -102,6 +102,13 @@ struct ima_queue_entry {
> > > > 
> > > >  };
> > > >  extern struct list_head ima_measurements;	/* list of all 
> measurements
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  */
> > > > 
> > > > +/* Some details preceding the binary serialized measurement list */
> > > > +struct ima_kexec_hdr {
> > > > +	unsigned short version;
> > > > +	unsigned long buffer_size;
> > > > +	unsigned long count;
> > > > +} __packed;
> > > > +
> > > 
> > > Am I understanding it correctly that this structure is passed between
> > > kernels?
> > Yes, the header prefixes the measurement list, which is being passed on
> > the same computer to the next kernel.  Could the architecture (eg.
> > LE/BE) change between soft re-boots?
> 
> Yes. I am able to boot a BE kernel from an LE kernel with my patches. 
> Whether we want to support that or not is another question...

The answer to that question is almost certainly yes - on POWER the most
immediate example would be soft-rebooting from a BE host into an LE
Petitboot kernel, or vice versa.