From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To: "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@kernel.org>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@kernel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
x86@kernel.org, "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Nikolay Borisov" <nik.borisov@suse.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Kees Cook" <kees@kernel.org>,
"Naveen N Rao" <naveen@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] x86/devmem: remove low 1MB hack for x86-64
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2025 21:25:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0dbb52fb-9e37-4b3e-a247-5946f08b846f@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <683f3c91c033f_1626e10021@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
On Tue, Jun 3, 2025, at 20:18, Dan Williams wrote:
> [add Naveen]
>
> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Thu, May 22, 2025, at 00:14, Dan Williams wrote:
>> > Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> The third one maps the BIOS area at 0xf0000, and as far as I can tell
>> the hack explicitly allowed mapping that even though it is marked
>> busy on x86-64 since 5d94e81f69d4 ("x86: Introduce pci_map_biosrom()").
>>
>> Is there any downside to marking this one non-busy and still allowing
>> the ROM to be mapped? Would that bring back the issue of conflicting
>> mapping flags between kernel and userspace?
>
> For the confidential VM case I expect the answer is "yes" per this patch
> attempt:
>
> http://lore.kernel.org/20250403120228.2344377-1-naveen@kernel.org
I thought the problem here was the read() on /dev/mem, not
the mmap(), are you sure it's both?
With this patch [3/3], the memremap() hack for mem_read() goes away on
64-bit, so there should be no way it gets mapped again using that,
and the generic devmem_is_allowed() just forbids it as well.
The mmap() access in turn goes through this function
pgprot_t phys_mem_access_prot(struct file *file, unsigned long pfn,
unsigned long size, pgprot_t vma_prot)
{
if (!phys_mem_access_encrypted(pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, size))
vma_prot = pgprot_decrypted(vma_prot);
return vma_prot;
}
which I would expect to return the correct vma_prot value already.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-03 19:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-20 15:20 [PATCH 1/3] x86/devmem: move range_is_allowed() to drivers/char/mem.c Arnd Bergmann
2025-05-20 15:20 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86/devmem: remove phys_mem_access_prot_allowed() Arnd Bergmann
2025-05-21 22:08 ` Dan Williams
2025-05-20 15:20 ` [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] x86/devmem: remove low 1MB hack for x86-64 Arnd Bergmann
2025-05-21 22:14 ` Dan Williams
2025-05-22 12:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-06-03 18:18 ` Dan Williams
2025-06-03 19:25 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2025-06-03 19:36 ` Dan Williams
2025-06-11 14:18 ` Naveen N Rao
2025-05-21 22:05 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86/devmem: move range_is_allowed() to drivers/char/mem.c Dan Williams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0dbb52fb-9e37-4b3e-a247-5946f08b846f@app.fastmail.com \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=naveen@kernel.org \
--cc=nik.borisov@suse.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®