From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
dan.j.williams@intel.com, jrg.otte@gmail.com,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] efi/x86: fix boot regression on systems with invalid memmap entries
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2020 10:34:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200202093442.GB72728@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200201233304.18322-1-ardb@kernel.org>
* Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org> wrote:
> In efi_clean_memmap(), we do a pass over the EFI memory map to remove
> bogus entries that may be returned on certain systems.
>
> Commit 1db91035d01aa8bf ("efi: Add tracking for dynamically allocated
> memmaps") refactored this code to pass the input to efi_memmap_install()
> via a temporary struct on the stack, which is populated using an
> initializer which inadvertently defines the value of its size field
> in terms of its desc_size field, which value cannot be relied upon yet
> in the initializer itself.
>
> Fix this by using efi.memmap.desc_size instead, which is where we get
> the value for desc_size from in the first place.
>
> Tested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> ---
> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
> index 59f7f6d60cf6..ae923ee8e2b4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
> @@ -308,7 +308,7 @@ static void __init efi_clean_memmap(void)
> .phys_map = efi.memmap.phys_map,
> .desc_version = efi.memmap.desc_version,
> .desc_size = efi.memmap.desc_size,
> - .size = data.desc_size * (efi.memmap.nr_map - n_removal),
> + .size = efi.memmap.desc_size * (efi.memmap.nr_map - n_removal),
> .flags = 0,
> };
Applied, and I also added:
Reported-by: Jörg Otte <jrg.otte@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Jörg Otte <jrg.otte@gmail.com>
I presumptively added the Jörg's Tested-by tag: won't send the commit to
Linus if he still has trouble booting the laptop.
I'm still amazed GCC doesn't warn about this pattern - why?
BTW., could we please also organize such assignments vertically as well:
.phys_map = efi.memmap.phys_map,
.desc_version = efi.memmap.desc_version,
.desc_size = efi.memmap.desc_size,
.size = efi.memmap.desc_size * (efi.memmap.nr_map - n_removal),
.flags = 0,
(See the patch below.)
Had we done that earlier the weird pattern would have stuck out a lot
more:
.phys_map = efi.memmap.phys_map,
.desc_version = efi.memmap.desc_version,
.desc_size = efi.memmap.desc_size,
.size = data.desc_size * (efi.memmap.nr_map - n_removal),
.flags = 0,
BTW., is there a reason "struct efi_memory_map" doesn't embedd a "struct
efi_memory_map_data"? Or is efi_memory_map firmware ABI?
If they shared the structure then copying would be easier.
Thanks,
Ingo
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
index ae923ee8e2b4..293c47f9cb39 100644
--- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
@@ -305,11 +305,11 @@ static void __init efi_clean_memmap(void)
if (n_removal > 0) {
struct efi_memory_map_data data = {
- .phys_map = efi.memmap.phys_map,
- .desc_version = efi.memmap.desc_version,
- .desc_size = efi.memmap.desc_size,
- .size = efi.memmap.desc_size * (efi.memmap.nr_map - n_removal),
- .flags = 0,
+ .phys_map = efi.memmap.phys_map,
+ .desc_version = efi.memmap.desc_version,
+ .desc_size = efi.memmap.desc_size,
+ .size = efi.memmap.desc_size * (efi.memmap.nr_map - n_removal),
+ .flags = 0,
};
pr_warn("Removing %d invalid memory map entries.\n", n_removal);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-02 9:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-01 23:33 Ard Biesheuvel
2020-02-02 9:34 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2020-02-02 9:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-02-02 9:39 ` [tip: efi/urgent] efi/x86: Fix " tip-bot2 for Ard Biesheuvel
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=20200202093442.GB72728@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=jrg.otte@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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®