Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/boot/KASLR: Restrict kernel to be randomized in mirror regions

From: Baoquan He
Date: Tue Jul 04 2017 - 19:17:00 EST


On 07/04/17 at 05:46pm, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Jul 2017, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > On Tue, 04 Jul, at 04:46:58PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Tue, 4 Jul 2017, Baoquan He wrote:
> > >
> > > > In fact I just referred to code in setup_arch(). Now I have a question,
> > > > though CONFIG_EFI=y but efi firmware is not enabled,
> > > > boot_params.efi_info.efi_loader_signature should be initilized to 0.
> > > > Then below code is also problematic.
> > > >
> > > > #ifdef CONFIG_EFI
> > > > if (!strncmp((char *)&boot_params.efi_info.efi_loader_signature,
> > > > EFI32_LOADER_SIGNATURE, 4)) {
> > > > set_bit(EFI_BOOT, &efi.flags);
> > > > } else if (!strncmp((char *)&boot_params.efi_info.efi_loader_signature,
> > > > EFI64_LOADER_SIGNATURE, 4)) {
> > > > set_bit(EFI_BOOT, &efi.flags);
> > > > set_bit(EFI_64BIT, &efi.flags);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > if (efi_enabled(EFI_BOOT))
> > > > efi_memblock_x86_reserve_range();
> > > > #endif
> > >
> > > Indeed. Matt?
> >
> > It's possibly that I'm missing some context, but boot_params should be
> > zero'd -- the x86 boot protocol requires that the entire data
> > structure be zero'd on allocation.
> >
> > Have I missed something?
>
> No. I misread the code. The strncmp() operates on
> boot_params.efi_info.efi_loader_signature itself, so yes, all is fine.

Sorry, I must be dizzy at late night of yesterday, just gave wrong
answer when questioned.

>
> It's just Baoquans copy and paste wreckage which is busted.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>