lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 3/8] x86/microcode/AMD: Check microcode container data in the early loader
On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 12:07:17AM +0200, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> Convert the early loader in the AMD microcode update driver to use the
> container data checking functions introduced by the previous commit.
>
> We have to be careful to call these functions with 'early' parameter set,
> so they won't try to print errors as the early loader runs too early for
> printk()-style functions to work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 59 ++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> index f9485ff7183c..f4c7479a961c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> @@ -224,29 +224,36 @@ static bool verify_patch(u8 family, const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size, bool early)
> * Returns the amount of bytes consumed while scanning. @desc contains all the
> * data we're going to use in later stages of the application.
> */
> -static ssize_t parse_container(u8 *ucode, ssize_t size, struct cont_desc *desc)
> +static size_t parse_container(u8 *ucode, size_t size, struct cont_desc *desc)
> {
> struct equiv_cpu_entry *eq;
> - ssize_t orig_size = size;
> + size_t orig_size = size;
> u32 *hdr = (u32 *)ucode;
> + u32 equiv_tbl_len;
> u16 eq_id;
> u8 *buf;
>
> - /* Am I looking at an equivalence table header? */
> - if (hdr[0] != UCODE_MAGIC ||
> - hdr[1] != UCODE_EQUIV_CPU_TABLE_TYPE ||
> - hdr[2] == 0)
> - return CONTAINER_HDR_SZ;
> + /*
> + * Skip one byte when a container cannot be parsed successfully
> + * so the parser will correctly skip unknown data of any size until
> + * it hopefully arrives at something that it is able to recognize.
> + */
> + if (!verify_container(ucode, size, true) ||
> + !verify_equivalence_table(ucode, size, true))

That function already calls verify_container().

> + return 1;
>
> buf = ucode;
>
> + equiv_tbl_len = hdr[2];
> eq = (struct equiv_cpu_entry *)(buf + CONTAINER_HDR_SZ);
>
> /* Find the equivalence ID of our CPU in this table: */
> eq_id = find_equiv_id(eq, desc->cpuid_1_eax);
>
> - buf += hdr[2] + CONTAINER_HDR_SZ;
> - size -= hdr[2] + CONTAINER_HDR_SZ;
> + buf += CONTAINER_HDR_SZ;
> + buf += equiv_tbl_len;
> + size -= CONTAINER_HDR_SZ;
> + size -= equiv_tbl_len;
>
> /*
> * Scan through the rest of the container to find where it ends. We do
> @@ -258,25 +265,27 @@ static ssize_t parse_container(u8 *ucode, ssize_t size, struct cont_desc *desc)
>
> hdr = (u32 *)buf;
>
> - if (hdr[0] != UCODE_UCODE_TYPE)
> + if (!verify_patch_section(buf, size, true))
> break;
>
> - /* Sanity-check patch size. */
> patch_size = hdr[1];
> - if (patch_size > PATCH_MAX_SIZE)
> - break;
>
> - /* Skip patch section header: */
> - buf += SECTION_HDR_SIZE;
> - size -= SECTION_HDR_SIZE;
> + mc = (struct microcode_amd *)(buf + SECTION_HDR_SIZE);
> + if (eq_id != mc->hdr.processor_rev_id)
> + goto next_patch;
>
> - mc = (struct microcode_amd *)buf;
> - if (eq_id == mc->hdr.processor_rev_id) {
> - desc->psize = patch_size;
> - desc->mc = mc;
> - }
> + if (!verify_patch(x86_family(desc->cpuid_1_eax), buf, size,
> + true))

Let it stick out.

Ok, so above you do verify_patch_section() and then you take patch_size
without fully verifying it - it can be something non-sensically huge and
thus we might skip over good patches.

What you should do instead is call verify_patch() directly - which
already calls verify_patch_section() and if the patch size exceeds the
per-family maximum, return *that* instead and skip only the per family
maximum inside the buffer so that any patches following can get a chance
to get inspected.

For that you'll have to reshuffle the change of integrating
verify_patch_size() to happen before that change here.

Thx.

--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-05 10:55    [W:0.066 / U:1.728 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site