|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] efi: xen: Implement memory descriptor lookup based on hypercall
On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 05:59:52PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 17:29, Demi Marie Obenour
> <demi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 01:26:24PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > Xen on x86 boots dom0 in EFI mode but without providing a memory map.
> > > This means that some sanity checks we would like to perform on
> > > configuration tables or other data structures in memory are not
> > > currently possible. Xen does, however, expose EFI memory descriptor info
> > > via a Xen hypercall, so let's wire that up instead.
> > >
> > > Co-developed-by: Demi Marie Obenour <demi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Demi Marie Obenour <demi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c | 5 ++-
> > > drivers/xen/efi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > > include/linux/efi.h | 1 +
> > > 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> > > index 55bd3f4aab28..2c12b1a06481 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> > > @@ -456,7 +456,7 @@ void __init efi_find_mirror(void)
> > > * and if so, populate the supplied memory descriptor with the
> > > appropriate
> > > * data.
> > > */
> > > -int efi_mem_desc_lookup(u64 phys_addr, efi_memory_desc_t *out_md)
> > > +int __efi_mem_desc_lookup(u64 phys_addr, efi_memory_desc_t *out_md)
> > > {
> > > efi_memory_desc_t *md;
> > >
> > > @@ -485,6 +485,9 @@ int efi_mem_desc_lookup(u64 phys_addr,
> > > efi_memory_desc_t *out_md)
> > > return -ENOENT;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +extern int efi_mem_desc_lookup(u64 phys_addr, efi_memory_desc_t *out_md)
> > > + __weak __alias(__efi_mem_desc_lookup);
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Calculate the highest address of an efi memory descriptor.
> > > */
> > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/efi.c b/drivers/xen/efi.c
> > > index d1ff2186ebb4..74f3f6d8cdc8 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/xen/efi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/xen/efi.c
> > > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> > >
> > > #include <xen/interface/xen.h>
> > > #include <xen/interface/platform.h>
> > > +#include <xen/page.h>
> > > #include <xen/xen.h>
> > > #include <xen/xen-ops.h>
> > >
> > > @@ -292,3 +293,36 @@ void __init xen_efi_runtime_setup(void)
> > > efi.get_next_high_mono_count = xen_efi_get_next_high_mono_count;
> > > efi.reset_system = xen_efi_reset_system;
> > > }
> > > +
> > > +int efi_mem_desc_lookup(u64 phys_addr, efi_memory_desc_t *out_md)
> > > +{
> > > + static_assert(XEN_PAGE_SHIFT == EFI_PAGE_SHIFT,
> > > + "Mismatch between EFI_PAGE_SHIFT and XEN_PAGE_SHIFT");
> > > + struct xen_platform_op op = {
> > > + .cmd = XENPF_firmware_info,
> > > + .u.firmware_info = {
> > > + .type = XEN_FW_EFI_INFO,
> > > + .index = XEN_FW_EFI_MEM_INFO,
> > > + .u.efi_info.mem.addr = phys_addr,
> > > + .u.efi_info.mem.size = U64_MAX - phys_addr,
> > > + }
> > > + };
> > > + union xenpf_efi_info *info = &op.u.firmware_info.u.efi_info;
> > > + int rc;
> > > +
> > > + if (!efi_enabled(EFI_PARAVIRT) || efi_enabled(EFI_MEMMAP))
> > > + return __efi_mem_desc_lookup(phys_addr, out_md);
> > > +
> > > + rc = HYPERVISOR_platform_op(&op);
> > > + if (rc) {
> > > + pr_warn("Failed to lookup header 0x%llx in Xen memory map:
> > > error %d\n",
> > > + phys_addr, rc);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + out_md->phys_addr = info->mem.addr;
> >
> > This will be equal to phys_addr, not the actual start of the memory
> > region.
> >
> > > + out_md->num_pages = info->mem.size >> EFI_PAGE_SHIFT;
> >
> > Similarly, this will be the number of bytes in the memory region
> > after phys_addr, not the total number of bytes in the region. These two
> > differences mean that this function is not strictly equivalent to the
> > original efi_mem_desc_lookup().
> >
> > I am not sure if this matters in practice, but I thought you would want
> > to be aware of it.
>
> This is a bit disappointing. Is there no way to obtain this
> information via a Xen hypercall?
It is possible, but doing so is very complex (it essentially requires a
binary search). This really should be fixed on the Xen side.
> In any case, it means we'll need to round down phys_addr to page size
> at the very least.
That makes sense. Are there any callers that will be broken even with
this rounding?
--
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
Invisible Things Lab
Attachment:
signature.asc
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |