Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751655AbdG1IGs (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 04:06:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48808 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751465AbdG1IGr (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 04:06:47 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com DD702386621 Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=bhe@redhat.com Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 16:06:40 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Matt Fleming , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org, 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 Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 RESEND] x86/boot/KASLR: Restrict kernel to be randomized in mirror regions Message-ID: <20170728080640.GK24304@x1> References: <1500542189-15779-1-git-send-email-bhe@redhat.com> <20170721103757.hc74czr3mfunrv6c@gmail.com> <20170721131956.GK2344@x1> <20170724133410.GC11076@codeblueprint.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170724133410.GC11076@codeblueprint.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:06:47 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 803 Lines: 24 Hi Ingo, On 07/24/17 at 02:34pm, Matt Fleming wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jul, at 09:19:56PM, Baoquan He wrote: > > > > There are places where the efi map is getting and used like this. E.g > > in efi_high_alloc() of drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub-helper.c. > > EFI developers worry the size of efi_memory_desc_t could not be the same > > as e->efi_memdesc_size? > > > > Hi Matt, > > > > Could you help have a look at this? > > You're exactly right. The code guards against the size of the > efi_memory_desc_t struct changing. The UEFI spec says to traverse the > memory map this way. I saw your new comment in v7 post. Matt has helped to confirm it. The EFI code was made to get efi memmap in that way on purpose. There are several sub-threads about this patch, it could be missed. Thanks Baoquan