From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEAAFC43441 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 09:21:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96148214DA for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 09:21:23 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 96148214DA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726854AbeJJQmi (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Oct 2018 12:42:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58808 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726562AbeJJQmi (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Oct 2018 12:42:38 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78FF1300206A; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 09:21:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-8-16.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.8.16]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A20268D36; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 09:21:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 17:21:17 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: Chao Fan Cc: Borislav Petkov , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, keescook@chromium.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, indou.takao@jp.fujitsu.com, caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, Masayoshi Mizuma Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/3] x86/boot/KASLR: Parse ACPI table and limit kaslr in immovable memory Message-ID: <20181010092117.GG25297@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> References: <20181010084119.17539-1-fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <20181010085920.GB5533@zn.tnic> <20181010090620.GF25297@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> <20181010091205.GA10618@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181010091205.GA10618@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.47]); Wed, 10 Oct 2018 09:21:21 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/10/18 at 05:12pm, Chao Fan wrote: > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 05:06:20PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > >Hi Boris, > > > >On 10/10/18 at 10:59am, Borislav Petkov wrote: > >> ... and we just picked up > >> > >> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181001140843.26137-1-msys.mizuma@gmail.com > >> > >> and without having looked at the rest of your stuff, if people accept > >> your solution, we don't need the silly parameter anymore, right? > >> > >> Which means, we should not rush the whole thing yet until the whole > >> KASLR vs movable memory gets solved properly. > > > >Masa's patches solves the problem in memory region KASLR which later hot > >added memory may be big than the default padding 10 TB. > > > >Chao's patches is trying to fix a conflict between 'movable_node' and > >kernel text KASLR. If 'movable_node' specified, we rely on SRAT to get > >which memory region is movable or immovable, and movable region can be > >hot removed. But if kernel is randomized into movable memory, it can't > >be hot removed any more, this is a regression after KASLR introduced. > >So this is a different issue than Masa's. > > Yes, they are two issues. > But if we can get more memory information by the function in > the new file acpi.c, semms it's helfpul to Masa's issue. Hmm, reading SRAT three times during x86 kernel boot? Maybe we try this after the function has run a time and proved very stable? Thanks Baoquan