[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86/kexec: Implement crash kexec for Secure Boot
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Kevin Lampis <kevin.lampis@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2026 19:46:51 +0000
- Accept-language: en-GB, en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=citrix.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=citrix.com; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector10001; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=58Rwls3Zbpy0A1Dlb1Ok3I/PGVzGJzrN/n2HeoWFT+0=; b=R1on5QuuA63MWQqG1azZ/T/mfQWbt0NcVcEmdgEUBbA4YK9G1YUUDfwMEBykUkKzgEUwDc9Mki+4CBG6a3vsTr3Yb6s8rJaRazZolbpjeVbiDdnkDOgaPlUgxpoBR7WsotVO/Hb3C2ihssXFJdylQAp2rNJNDiQWHc5jaPsaFyv0nGEZjfpmL98agQXq6PSiI+Rc6DkQ5FoNtO+zVcGgMxmoCPib6KYqXA4VfM/7FSyL8B44omoxVtnEIuDkQ9X9HPq9Xc4lkFA4LSksctGwo+AwUE/tnvQPZqDy0SS6PzTZq+BT5UcsEeA0lgUPEM4SP3bfJmqSd0Q2eKLUrpBN9g==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector10001; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=YdyoZ7cDAe2aebr2LK3ayzoso6e9Yk8/yPzIfxWEEGRGUicraaOWAlNlMmHBqvNRHZydGQLdeIdg3jAznx7vsBUc2JgNUXjV9zsnuAOW5BEjlvGX1SMGHbsqBW+aA09RabaoLyXQz4eck2dy2WbNNJLz3PW2U2vykNtnZ2xtTawFjdvPAlJyk/EvQCzVvYbBJOpQT0dMruzrF/Ahb6u+JDojXz5o7ZQoLeGWq/MUQMC6YPObu2lWonkMog+UJSwpj2ZlmS56UOMI4MB7XjMtHxf+/QaY6t67EbQMPoAi1ZLso3dhkYv6Gq+8e/WVYlNH4L1W5dJ4YEXNZPUCpwcMKQ==
- Authentication-results: eu.smtp.expurgate.cloud; dkim=pass header.s=selector1 header.d=citrix.com header.i="@citrix.com" header.h="From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck"
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=citrix.com;
- Cc: "jbeulich@xxxxxxxx" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 04 Jun 2026 19:47:15 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Msip_labels:
- Thread-index: AQHc8q+VtM9vdfdFGkSSgX8o+ahXxbYtEQcAgAG9z6k=
- Thread-topic: [PATCH 0/2] x86/kexec: Implement crash kexec for Secure Boot
>You have identified that bzimage is x86 specific, and for that reason it
>should not be included in common/kexec.c.
I believe Ross moved the definition of setup_header out of kexec.c because
kimage.c also needs to use it now.
>We are going to need an
>architecture specific way of figuring out the alignment, but looking at
>kimage_find_kernel_entry_maddr(), why can't we just use the EFI header?
"Going to need" like "it would be nice" or "we absolutely can't merge this"? :)
I feel like I might get bludgeoned to death by a set of bagpipes if I have to
tell a certain someone that there's more kexec work to do...
>Why is it [digest checks] tied to
>KEXEC_TYPE_CRASH_EFI? It's applicable to all kexec types. This ought
>to be first first in the series so it's not tied to EFI.
I can do KEXEC_TYPE_CRASH_EFI and KEXEC_TYPE_CRASH but there's an extra layer
of complexity with normal kexec.
kimage_load_normal_segment() copies the segments data into temporary,
non-contiguous buffers and then sets up a relocation table which kexec_reloc.S
uses to copy the segments data into the correct place before jumping to the new
kernel. Calculating and verifying the digest for normal kexec would mean new
code to walk the relocation table to find every temporary buffer.
As we discussed internally I'd rather not touch the normal kexec code
unless I'm fixing all the existing issues and can actually test the changes.
I've sorted out all the other things you mentioned but still in the process of
splitting the patches up.
|
