Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode: Adjust ramdisk address when accessing by
 virtual address
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
References: <1482161533-21097-1-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
 <20161219153714.rhbpvcauc5xigzua@pd.tnic>
 <383d2984-fdd0-a198-4477-677b992fc955@oracle.com>
 <20161219164027.ejbf3h6qsnkjjezy@pd.tnic>
 <20161219180709.2tsvsebagdiyxxrs@pd.tnic>
 <f9a50117-b404-da6f-e54a-f8b40e765c1b@oracle.com>
 <20161219184340.4tzv2hg2vf3n63b7@pd.tnic>
 <20161219233229.p5uw2thbl55o26ds@pd.tnic>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <22d4e277-81bb-ef10-3f55-f8f947df60e8@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:27:29 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20161219233229.p5uw2thbl55o26ds@pd.tnic>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1330
Lines: 55


On 12/19/2016 06:32 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 07:43:40PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 01:12:25PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> IIUIC find_microcode_in_initrd() is called with paging on only on Intel
>>> (which is where I observed it).
>>
>> Ah, that was an important fact. Yes, I can repro it now.
>
> Ok, questions:
>
> * does your guest relocate the ramdisk?


This is not a guest. I crashed with baremetal kernel.


>
> I.e., do you see something like this in dmesg before the splat:
>
> [    0.000000] RAMDISK: [mem 0x7f84c000-0x7ffcffff]
> [    0.000000] Allocated new RAMDISK: [mem 0x3647a000-0x36bfd9e6]
> [    0.000000] Move RAMDISK from [mem 0x7f84c000-0x7ffcf9e6] to [mem 0x3647a000-0x36bfd9e6]
> 	       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> If not, then I know what happens.
>
> Also, does it work if you change these lines:
>
>         if (!use_pa && relocated_ramdisk)
>                 start = initrd_start;
>
> to:
>
>         if (!use_pa)
>                 start = initrd_start;

Yes, it does.

I also thought it might be better but I haven't gone through the code to 
make sure this would always work.

I can run more tests tomorrow if you want.

-boris

>
>
> Because if that works, I can actually simplify that function radically.
>
> But more tomorrow.
>
> Thanks.
>