Patch "efi/x86: Prune invalid memory map entries and fix boot regression" has been added to the 4.9-stable tree

Patch "efi/x86: Prune invalid memory map entries and fix boot regression" has been added to the 4.9-stable tree

[gregkh]

This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    efi/x86: Prune invalid memory map entries and fix boot regression

to the 4.9-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     efi-x86-prune-invalid-memory-map-entries-and-fix-boot-regression.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.9 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From 0100a3e67a9cef64d72cd3a1da86f3ddbee50363 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 18:42:28 -0500
Subject: efi/x86: Prune invalid memory map entries and fix boot regression

From: Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>

commit 0100a3e67a9cef64d72cd3a1da86f3ddbee50363 upstream.

Some machines, such as the Lenovo ThinkPad W541 with firmware GNET80WW
(2.28), include memory map entries with phys_addr=0x0 and num_pages=0.

These machines fail to boot after the following commit,

  commit 8e80632fb23f ("efi/esrt: Use efi_mem_reserve() and avoid a kmalloc()")

Fix this by removing such bogus entries from the memory map.

Furthermore, currently the log output for this case (with efi=debug)
looks like:

 [    0.000000] efi: mem45: [Reserved           |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  ] range=[0x0000000000000000-0xffffffffffffffff] (0MB)

This is clearly wrong, and also not as informative as it could be.  This
patch changes it so that if we find obviously invalid memory map
entries, we print an error and skip those entries.  It also detects the
display of the address range calculation overflow, so the new output is:

 [    0.000000] efi: [Firmware Bug]: Invalid EFI memory map entries:
 [    0.000000] efi: mem45: [Reserved           |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |   |  |  |  |  ] range=[0x0000000000000000-0x0000000000000000] (invalid)

It also detects memory map sizes that would overflow the physical
address, for example phys_addr=0xfffffffffffff000 and
num_pages=0x0200000000000001, and prints:

 [    0.000000] efi: [Firmware Bug]: Invalid EFI memory map entries:
 [    0.000000] efi: mem45: [Reserved           |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |   |  |  |  |  ] range=[phys_addr=0xfffffffffffff000-0x20ffffffffffffffff] (invalid)

It then removes these entries from the memory map.

Signed-off-by: Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
[ardb: refactor for clarity with no functional changes, avoid PAGE_SHIFT]
Signed-off-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
[Matt: Include bugzilla info in commit log]
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=191121
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
 arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c |   66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/efi.h         |    1 
 2 files changed, 67 insertions(+)

--- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
@@ -210,6 +210,70 @@ int __init efi_memblock_x86_reserve_rang
 	return 0;
 }
 
+#define OVERFLOW_ADDR_SHIFT	(64 - EFI_PAGE_SHIFT)
+#define OVERFLOW_ADDR_MASK	(U64_MAX << OVERFLOW_ADDR_SHIFT)
+#define U64_HIGH_BIT		(~(U64_MAX >> 1))
+
+static bool __init efi_memmap_entry_valid(const efi_memory_desc_t *md, int i)
+{
+	u64 end = (md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT) + md->phys_addr - 1;
+	u64 end_hi = 0;
+	char buf[64];
+
+	if (md->num_pages == 0) {
+		end = 0;
+	} else if (md->num_pages > EFI_PAGES_MAX ||
+		   EFI_PAGES_MAX - md->num_pages <
+		   (md->phys_addr >> EFI_PAGE_SHIFT)) {
+		end_hi = (md->num_pages & OVERFLOW_ADDR_MASK)
+			>> OVERFLOW_ADDR_SHIFT;
+
+		if ((md->phys_addr & U64_HIGH_BIT) && !(end & U64_HIGH_BIT))
+			end_hi += 1;
+	} else {
+		return true;
+	}
+
+	pr_warn_once(FW_BUG "Invalid EFI memory map entries:\n");
+
+	if (end_hi) {
+		pr_warn("mem%02u: %s range=[0x%016llx-0x%llx%016llx] (invalid)\n",
+			i, efi_md_typeattr_format(buf, sizeof(buf), md),
+			md->phys_addr, end_hi, end);
+	} else {
+		pr_warn("mem%02u: %s range=[0x%016llx-0x%016llx] (invalid)\n",
+			i, efi_md_typeattr_format(buf, sizeof(buf), md),
+			md->phys_addr, end);
+	}
+	return false;
+}
+
+static void __init efi_clean_memmap(void)
+{
+	efi_memory_desc_t *out = efi.memmap.map;
+	const efi_memory_desc_t *in = out;
+	const efi_memory_desc_t *end = efi.memmap.map_end;
+	int i, n_removal;
+
+	for (i = n_removal = 0; in < end; i++) {
+		if (efi_memmap_entry_valid(in, i)) {
+			if (out != in)
+				memcpy(out, in, efi.memmap.desc_size);
+			out = (void *)out + efi.memmap.desc_size;
+		} else {
+			n_removal++;
+		}
+		in = (void *)in + efi.memmap.desc_size;
+	}
+
+	if (n_removal > 0) {
+		u64 size = efi.memmap.nr_map - n_removal;
+
+		pr_warn("Removing %d invalid memory map entries.\n", n_removal);
+		efi_memmap_install(efi.memmap.phys_map, size);
+	}
+}
+
 void __init efi_print_memmap(void)
 {
 	efi_memory_desc_t *md;
@@ -472,6 +536,8 @@ void __init efi_init(void)
 		}
 	}
 
+	efi_clean_memmap();
+
 	if (efi_enabled(EFI_DBG))
 		efi_print_memmap();
 }
--- a/include/linux/efi.h
+++ b/include/linux/efi.h
@@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ typedef	struct {
 
 #define EFI_PAGE_SHIFT		12
 #define EFI_PAGE_SIZE		(1UL << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT)
+#define EFI_PAGES_MAX		(U64_MAX >> EFI_PAGE_SHIFT)
 
 typedef struct {
 	u32 type;


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from pjones@redhat.com are

queue-4.9/efi-x86-prune-invalid-memory-map-entries-and-fix-boot-regression.patch