From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org,
matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com,
izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com, fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com,
thgarnie@google.com, n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com,
dyoung@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] x86/boot/KASLR: Restrict kernel to be randomized in mirror regions
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:46:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170728064614.lcntuaovomcqwxx4@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1501041620-4965-1-git-send-email-bhe@redhat.com>
* Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> Currently KASLR will parse all e820 entries of RAM type and add all
> candidate position into slots array. Then we will choose one slot
> randomly as the new position which kernel will be decompressed into
> and run at.
>
> On system with EFI enabled, e820 memory regions are coming from EFI
> memory regions by combining adjacent regions. While these EFI memory
> regions have more attributes to mark their different use. Mirror
> attribute is such kind. The physical memory region whose descriptors
> in EFI memory map has EFI_MEMORY_MORE_RELIABLE attribute (bit: 16) are
> mirrored. The address range mirroring feature of kernel arranges such
> mirror region into normal zone and other region into movable zone. And
> with mirroring feature enabled, the code and date of kernel can only be
> located in more reliable mirror region. However, the current KASLR code
> doesn't check EFI memory entries, and could choose new position in
> non-mirrored region. This will break the functionality of the address
> range mirroring feature.
>
> So if EFI is detected, iterate EFI memory map and pick the mirror region
> to process for adding candidate of randomization slot. If EFI is disabled
> or no mirror region found, still process e820 memory map.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> ---
> v6->v7:
> Ingo pointed out several incorrect line break issues and unclear
> description of patch log. Correct them and rewrite patch log.
>
> And also rewrite the EFI warning message that if EFI memmap is above
> 4G in 32bit system since 32bit system can not handle data above 4G at
> kernel decompression stage. This is suggested by Ingo too.
>
> v5->v6:
> Code style issue fix according to Kees's comment.
>
> This is based on tip/x86/boot, patch 1,2,3/4 in v5 post has
> been put into tip/x86/boot now.
>
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> index 99c7194f7ea6..e1dd59ea8a8f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> @@ -37,7 +37,9 @@
> #include <linux/uts.h>
> #include <linux/utsname.h>
> #include <linux/ctype.h>
> +#include <linux/efi.h>
> #include <generated/utsrelease.h>
> +#include <asm/efi.h>
>
> /* Macros used by the included decompressor code below. */
> #define STATIC
> @@ -558,6 +560,65 @@ static void process_mem_region(struct mem_vector *entry,
> }
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_EFI
> +/*
> + * Returns true if mirror region found (and must have been processed
> + * for slots adding)
> + */
> +static bool
> +process_efi_entries(unsigned long minimum, unsigned long image_size)
> +{
> + struct efi_info *e = &boot_params->efi_info;
> + bool efi_mirror_found = false;
> + struct mem_vector region;
> + efi_memory_desc_t *md;
> + unsigned long pmap;
> + char *signature;
> + u32 nr_desc;
> + int i;
> +
> + signature = (char *)&e->efi_loader_signature;
> + if (strncmp(signature, EFI32_LOADER_SIGNATURE, 4) &&
> + strncmp(signature, EFI64_LOADER_SIGNATURE, 4))
> + return false;
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> + /* Can't handle data above 4GB at this time */
> + if (e->efi_memmap_hi) {
> + warn("EFI memmap is above 4GB, can't be handled now on x86_32. EFI should be disabled.\n");
> + return false;
> + }
> + pmap = e->efi_memmap;
> +#else
> + pmap = (e->efi_memmap | ((__u64)e->efi_memmap_hi << 32));
> +#endif
> +
> + nr_desc = e->efi_memmap_size / e->efi_memdesc_size;
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_desc; i++) {
> + md = (efi_memory_desc_t *)(pmap + (i * e->efi_memdesc_size));
> + if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_MORE_RELIABLE) {
> + region.start = md->phys_addr;
> + region.size = md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT;
> + process_mem_region(®ion, minimum, image_size);
> + efi_mirror_found = true;
> +
> + if (slot_area_index == MAX_SLOT_AREA) {
> + debug_putstr("Aborted EFI scan (slot_areas full)!\n");
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> + }
So I suggested this before: if you treat 'md' as an array of elements (which it
is), then the type cast can be moved to a more natural point, where we do address
calculations anyway:
md = (efi_memory_desc_t *)(e->efi_memmap | ((__u64)e->efi_memmap_hi << 32)));
The 'pmap' variable can be eliminated and all places in the loop that use 'md->'
can use 'md[i].'.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-28 6:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-26 4:00 Baoquan He
2017-07-28 6:46 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2017-07-28 8:33 ` Baoquan He
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=20170728064614.lcntuaovomcqwxx4@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thgarnie@google.com \
/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®