Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 6 Sep 2019 17:07:37 +0200
From:   Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Thomas <trenn@suse.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: /dev/mem and secure boot
Message-ID: <20190906170737.1a00178c@endymion>
In-Reply-To: <20190906121510.GA17328@kroah.com>
References: <20190906130221.0b47a565@endymion>
        <20190906121510.GA17328@kroah.com>
Organization: SUSE Linux
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 14:15:10 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 01:02:21PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > I've been bitten recently by mcelog not working on machines started in
> > secure boot mode. mcelog tries to read DMI information from /dev/mem
> > and fails to open it.  
> 
> What do you mean by "secure boot"?  Is this matthew's patchset that
> restricts /dev/mem/ or something else?

I mean that early in the kernel log is:

Secure boot enabled and kernel locked down

> > This made me wonder: if not even root can read /dev/mem (nor, I
> > suppose, /dev/kmem and /dev/port) in secure boot mode, why are we
> > creating these device nodes at all in the first place? Can't we detect
> > that we are in secure boot mode and skip that step, and reap the rewards
> > (faster boot, lower memory footprint and less confusion)?  
> 
> Sure, feel free to not register it at all if the mode is enabled.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h


-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support