lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/1] x86/boot/compressed: Fix reloading of GDTR post-relocation
On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 at 16:16, Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 09:12:29AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > Commit ef5a7b5eb13e ("efi/x86: Remove GDT setup from efi_main")
> > > introduced GDT setup into the 32-bit kernel's startup_32, and reloads
> > > the GDTR after relocating the kernel for paranoia's sake.
> > >
> > > Commit 32d009137a56 ("x86/boot: Reload GDTR after copying to the end of
> > > the buffer") introduced a similar GDTR reload in the 64-bit kernel.
> > >
> > > The GDTR is adjusted by init_size - _end, however this may not be the
> > > correct offset to apply if the kernel was loaded at a misaligned address
> > > or below LOAD_PHYSICAL_ADDR, as in that case the decompression buffer
> > > has an additional offset from the original load address.
> > >
> > > This should never happen for a conformant bootloader, but we're being
> > > paranoid anyway, so just store the new GDT address in there instead of
> > > adding any offsets, which is simpler as well.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
> > > Fixes: ef5a7b5eb13e ("efi/x86: Remove GDT setup from efi_main")
> > > Fixes: 32d009137a56 ("x86/boot: Reload GDTR after copying to the end of the buffer")
> >
> > Have you or anyone else observed this condition practice, or have a
> > suspicion that this could happen - or is this a mostly theoretical
> > concern?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ingo
>
> Right now it's a theoretical concern.
>
> I'm working on another patch, to tell the EFI firmware PE loader what
> the kernel's preferred address is, so that we can avoid having to
> relocate the kernel in the EFI stub in most cases (ie if the PE loader
> manages to load us at that address). With those changes, the required
> adjustment won't be init_size - _end any more, and while fixing it up
> there, I noticed that it could already be the case that the required
> adjustment is different.
>

Do you mean setting the image address in the PE/COFF header to the
preferred address?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-27 16:22    [W:0.105 / U:0.368 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site