From: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@fb.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
"llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
"kbuild-all@lists.01.org" <kbuild-all@lists.01.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
"kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: Correctly annotate IMA kexec buffer functions
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:49:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YryQvUtupEgn+vO1@noodles-fedora.dhcp.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YrxbK4IsYb6yls5d@zn.tnic>
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 09:52:50AM +0000, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> > Below is on top of what was in tip; I can roll a v7 if preferred but
> > I think seeing the fix on its own is clearer.
>
> Yes, and you don't have to base it on top because, as I've said, I've
> zapped your other patch there.
>
> Once IMA folks are fine with that fix of yours I can take both, if they
> wish so.
I'll roll a v7 collapsing them together and moving to __init as per
below.
> > ima_free_kexec_buffer() calls into memblock_phys_free() so must be
> > annotated __meminit.
>
> Why __meminit?
>
> The very sparse comment over it says:
>
> /* Used for MEMORY_HOTPLUG */
> #define __meminit __section(".meminit.text") __cold notrace \
> __latent_entropy
>
> so how does ima_free_kexec_buffer() have anything to do with
> MEMORY_HOTPLUG?
>
> It calls memblock_phys_free() which is __init_memblock.
>
> Now __init_memblock is defined as
>
> #define __init_memblock __meminit
>
> for some CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK thing so I guess that is the
> connection.
>
> But then the couple other functions which call into memblock are all
> __init...
>
> IOW, I probably am missing something...
I think the answer is that __meminit (or __init_memblock) works out as
the minimum required annotation, because memblock_phys_free() has that
annotation, but having looked closer at the call stack all of the usage
is under ima_init() which is marked __init, so it's more appropriate to
use that and discard the code after boot. There's no need for the ima
related functions to stay hanging around in the case memory hotplug is
enabled, because it's purely a boot time mechanism for passing the
buffer over a kexec boundary.
J.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@fb.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
"llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
"kbuild-all@lists.01.org" <kbuild-all@lists.01.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
"kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: Correctly annotate IMA kexec buffer functions
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:49:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YryQvUtupEgn+vO1@noodles-fedora.dhcp.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YrxbK4IsYb6yls5d@zn.tnic>
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 09:52:50AM +0000, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> > Below is on top of what was in tip; I can roll a v7 if preferred but
> > I think seeing the fix on its own is clearer.
>
> Yes, and you don't have to base it on top because, as I've said, I've
> zapped your other patch there.
>
> Once IMA folks are fine with that fix of yours I can take both, if they
> wish so.
I'll roll a v7 collapsing them together and moving to __init as per
below.
> > ima_free_kexec_buffer() calls into memblock_phys_free() so must be
> > annotated __meminit.
>
> Why __meminit?
>
> The very sparse comment over it says:
>
> /* Used for MEMORY_HOTPLUG */
> #define __meminit __section(".meminit.text") __cold notrace \
> __latent_entropy
>
> so how does ima_free_kexec_buffer() have anything to do with
> MEMORY_HOTPLUG?
>
> It calls memblock_phys_free() which is __init_memblock.
>
> Now __init_memblock is defined as
>
> #define __init_memblock __meminit
>
> for some CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK thing so I guess that is the
> connection.
>
> But then the couple other functions which call into memblock are all
> __init...
>
> IOW, I probably am missing something...
I think the answer is that __meminit (or __init_memblock) works out as
the minimum required annotation, because memblock_phys_free() has that
annotation, but having looked closer at the call stack all of the usage
is under ima_init() which is marked __init, so it's more appropriate to
use that and discard the code after boot. There's no need for the ima
related functions to stay hanging around in the case memory hotplug is
enabled, because it's purely a boot time mechanism for passing the
buffer over a kexec boundary.
J.
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@fb.com>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: Correctly annotate IMA kexec buffer functions
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:49:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YryQvUtupEgn+vO1@noodles-fedora.dhcp.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YrxbK4IsYb6yls5d@zn.tnic>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1880 bytes --]
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 09:52:50AM +0000, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> > Below is on top of what was in tip; I can roll a v7 if preferred but
> > I think seeing the fix on its own is clearer.
>
> Yes, and you don't have to base it on top because, as I've said, I've
> zapped your other patch there.
>
> Once IMA folks are fine with that fix of yours I can take both, if they
> wish so.
I'll roll a v7 collapsing them together and moving to __init as per
below.
> > ima_free_kexec_buffer() calls into memblock_phys_free() so must be
> > annotated __meminit.
>
> Why __meminit?
>
> The very sparse comment over it says:
>
> /* Used for MEMORY_HOTPLUG */
> #define __meminit __section(".meminit.text") __cold notrace \
> __latent_entropy
>
> so how does ima_free_kexec_buffer() have anything to do with
> MEMORY_HOTPLUG?
>
> It calls memblock_phys_free() which is __init_memblock.
>
> Now __init_memblock is defined as
>
> #define __init_memblock __meminit
>
> for some CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK thing so I guess that is the
> connection.
>
> But then the couple other functions which call into memblock are all
> __init...
>
> IOW, I probably am missing something...
I think the answer is that __meminit (or __init_memblock) works out as
the minimum required annotation, because memblock_phys_free() has that
annotation, but having looked closer at the call stack all of the usage
is under ima_init() which is marked __init, so it's more appropriate to
use that and discard the code after boot. There's no need for the ima
related functions to stay hanging around in the case memory hotplug is
enabled, because it's purely a boot time mechanism for passing the
buffer over a kexec boundary.
J.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-29 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-29 2:52 [tip:x86/kdump 1/1] WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x1e7210c): Section mismatch in reference from the function ima_free_kexec_buffer() to the function .meminit.text:memblock_phys_free() kernel test robot
2022-06-29 8:38 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-06-29 8:38 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-06-29 9:52 ` [PATCH] of: Correctly annotate IMA kexec buffer functions Jonathan McDowell
2022-06-29 9:52 ` Jonathan McDowell
2022-06-29 9:52 ` Jonathan McDowell
2022-06-29 14:01 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-06-29 14:01 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-06-29 14:01 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-06-29 17:49 ` Jonathan McDowell [this message]
2022-06-29 17:49 ` Jonathan McDowell
2022-06-29 17:49 ` Jonathan McDowell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YryQvUtupEgn+vO1@noodles-fedora.dhcp.thefacebook.com \
--to=noodles@fb.com \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.