Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] x86/mm/pageattr: Ensure cpa->pfn only contains page frame numbers

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 09:19:01PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Nov 2015, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > > The x86 pageattr code is confused about the data that is stored
> > > cpa->pfn, sometimes it's treated as a page frame number, sometimes
> > > it's treated as an unshifted physical address, and in one place it's
> > > treated as a pte.
> > 
> > Yuck.
> 
> This paragraph should read like this instead:
> 
> "Boris used cpa->pfn as a scratch variable to contain the physical
> address. He realizes now that he should've added a separate
> cpa_data.phys_addr then, instead of confusing everybody."
> 
> > > The result of this is that the mapping functions do not map the
> > > intended physical address.
> > > 
> > > This isn't a problem in practice because most of the addresses we're
> > > mapping in the EFI code paths are already mapped in 'trampoline_pgd'
> > > and so the pageattr mappings functions don't actually do anything in
> > > this case. But when we move to using a separate page table for the EFI
> > > runtime this will be an issue.
> > 
> > Are you sure that this does not affect existing kernel versions?
> 
> Shouldn't because with this new patchset we're copying all the PGDs from
> the kernel page table before doing an EFI call, see
> efi_sync_low_kernel_mappings() in patch 5.
> 
> > >  	while (num_pages-- && start < end) {
> > > -
> > > -		/* deal with the NX bit */
> > > -		if (!(pgprot_val(pgprot) & _PAGE_NX))
> > > -			cpa->pfn &= ~_PAGE_NX;
> > 
> > That should be a seperate patch because this is just bogus code and
> > has nothing to do with the pfn confusion.
> 
> Why bogus?

Even with cpa->pfn used as an address it cannot ever be set as the
address is page aligned ....

Thanks,

	tglx