Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] usb: early: add support for early printk through USB3 debug port

Hi, On 11/11/15 at 09:32am, Lu, Baolu wrote: > > > On 11/10/2015 05:39 PM, Dave Young wrote: > >Hi, > > > >On 11/09/15 at 03:38pm, Lu Baolu wrote: > >>This patch series adds support for early printk through USB3 debug port. > >>USB3 debug port is d

Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] usb: early: add support for early printk through USB3 debug port

Hi, On 11/09/15 at 03:38pm, Lu Baolu wrote: > This patch series adds support for early printk through USB3 debug port. > USB3 debug port is described in xHCI specification as an optional extended > capability. > I did a test with your previous patchset with the manually wired cable. debug host

Re: [PATCH v3 01/12] usb: xhci: add sysfs file for xHCI debug port

[snip] > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-sysfs.c b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-sysfs.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000..0192ac4 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-sysfs.c > @@ -0,0 +1,100 @@ > +/* > + * sysfs interface for xHCI host controller driver > + * > + * Copyright (C) 2015

Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] usb: early: add support for early printk through USB3 debug port

Hi, On 11/09/15 at 03:38pm, Lu Baolu wrote: > This patch series adds support for early printk through USB3 debug port. > USB3 debug port is described in xHCI specification as an optional extended > capability. > I did a test with your previous patchset with the manually wired cable. debug host

Re: [PATCH v3 01/12] usb: xhci: add sysfs file for xHCI debug port

[snip] > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-sysfs.c b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-sysfs.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000..0192ac4 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-sysfs.c > @@ -0,0 +1,100 @@ > +/* > + * sysfs interface for xHCI host controller driver > + * > + * Copyright (C) 2015

Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] usb: early: add support for early printk through USB3 debug port

Hi, On 11/11/15 at 09:32am, Lu, Baolu wrote: > > > On 11/10/2015 05:39 PM, Dave Young wrote: > >Hi, > > > >On 11/09/15 at 03:38pm, Lu Baolu wrote: > >>This patch series adds support for early printk through USB3 debug port. > >>USB3 debug port is d

Re: [PATCH 00/12] usb: early: add support for early printk through USB3 debug port

On 10/28/15 at 04:00pm, Lu Baolu wrote: > This patch series adds support for early printk through USB3 debug port. > USB3 debug port is described in xHCI specification as an optional extended > capability. > > The first patch adds a file in debugfs, through which users can check > whether the

Re: [PATCH 00/12] usb: early: add support for early printk through USB3 debug port

On 10/28/15 at 04:00pm, Lu Baolu wrote: > This patch series adds support for early printk through USB3 debug port. > USB3 debug port is described in xHCI specification as an optional extended > capability. > > The first patch adds a file in debugfs, through which users can check > whether the

Re: [PATCH 4/5] x86/setup/crash: Check memblock_reserve() retval

return > value and we exit early with a failure message in the error case. > > Cc: Andrew Morton > Cc: Andy Lutomirski > Cc: Dave Young > Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" > Cc: Ingo Molnar > Cc: jerry_hoem...@hp.com > Cc: Jiri Kosina > Cc: Joerg Roedel > Cc: Jue

Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86/setup/crash: Cleanup some code

crash: Cleanup some more > x86/setup/crash: Check memblock_reserve() retval > kexec/crash: Say which char is the unrecognized > > arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 81 > + > kernel/kexec_core.c | 6 ++-- > 2 files changed, 45

Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86/setup/crash: Cleanup some code

++-- > 2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.3.5 > > Reviewed-by: Dave Young <dyo...@redhat.com> Thanks Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH 4/5] x86/setup/crash: Check memblock_reserve() retval

d. Make sure we check that return > value and we exit early with a failure message in the error case. > > Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <l...@amacapital.net> > Cc: Dave Young <dyo...@redhat.com> > Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <

Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: fix out of the ELF headers buffer issue in syscall kexec_file_load()

anges)++; > return 0; > @@ -214,7 +213,7 @@ static void fill_up_crash_elf_data(struct crash_elf_data > *ced, > > ced->image = image; > > - walk_system_ram_range(0, -1, _ranges, > + walk_system_ram_res(0, -1, _ranges, >

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64/efi: Don't pad between EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME regions

On 09/27/15 at 12:40pm, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 09:06:44AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Could we please re-list all the arguments pro and contra of 1:1 physical > > mappings, > > in a post that also explains the background so that more people can chime > > in, not > >

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64/efi: Don't pad between EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME regions

On 09/27/15 at 12:40pm, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 09:06:44AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Could we please re-list all the arguments pro and contra of 1:1 physical > > mappings, > > in a post that also explains the background so that more people can chime > > in, not > >

Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: fix out of the ELF headers buffer issue in syscall kexec_file_load()

t; (*nr_ranges)++; > return 0; > @@ -214,7 +213,7 @@ static void fill_up_crash_elf_data(struct crash_elf_data > *ced, > > ced->image = image; > > - walk_system_ram_range(0, -1, _ranges, > + walk_system_ram_res(0, -1, _ranges, >

Re: [PATCH V2] kexec: Use file name as the output message prefix

On 09/25/15 at 01:04pm, Dave Young wrote: > On 09/24/15 at 02:07pm, Minfei Huang wrote: > > kexec output message misses the prefix "kexec", when Dave Young split > > the kexec code. Now, we use file name as the output message prefix. > > > > Currectly, the f

Re: [PATCH V2] kexec: Use file name as the output message prefix

On 09/24/15 at 02:07pm, Minfei Huang wrote: > kexec output message misses the prefix "kexec", when Dave Young split > the kexec code. Now, we use file name as the output message prefix. > > Currectly, the format of output message: > [ 140.290795] SYSC_kexec_load: hel

Re: [PATCH V2] kexec: Use file name as the output message prefix

On 09/24/15 at 02:07pm, Minfei Huang wrote: > kexec output message misses the prefix "kexec", when Dave Young split > the kexec code. Now, we use file name as the output message prefix. > > Currectly, the format of output message: > [ 140.290795] SYSC_kexec_load: hel

Re: [PATCH V2] kexec: Use file name as the output message prefix

On 09/25/15 at 01:04pm, Dave Young wrote: > On 09/24/15 at 02:07pm, Minfei Huang wrote: > > kexec output message misses the prefix "kexec", when Dave Young split > > the kexec code. Now, we use file name as the output message prefix. > > > > Currectly, the f

Re: [PATCH] kexec: Add prefix "kexec" to output message

On 09/23/15 at 10:49am, Baoquan He wrote: > On 09/23/15 at 09:37am, Dave Young wrote: > > > > Hi, Dave. > > > > > > > > How about removing all of the prefix "crashkernel" in kexec_core. Thus > > > > we can be consistent with the

Re: [PATCH] kexec: Add prefix "kexec" to output message

On 09/23/15 at 10:49am, Baoquan He wrote: > On 09/23/15 at 09:37am, Dave Young wrote: > > > > Hi, Dave. > > > > > > > > How about removing all of the prefix "crashkernel" in kexec_core. Thus > > > > we can be consistent with the

Re: [PATCH] kexec: Add prefix "kexec" to output message

On 09/23/15 at 12:07am, Minfei Huang wrote: > On 09/15/15 at 11:08am, Minfei Huang wrote: > > On 09/14/15 at 04:44pm, Dave Young wrote: > > > On 09/14/15 at 03:50pm, Minfei Huang wrote: > > > > On 09/13/15 at 11:52am, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

Re: [PATCH] kexec: Add prefix "kexec" to output message

On 09/23/15 at 12:07am, Minfei Huang wrote: > On 09/15/15 at 11:08am, Minfei Huang wrote: > > On 09/14/15 at 04:44pm, Dave Young wrote: > > > On 09/14/15 at 03:50pm, Minfei Huang wrote: > > > > On 09/13/15 at 11:52am, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > >

Re: [PATCH] vmcore: replace Elf64_Ehdr/Elf32_Ehdr with elfhdr

Cc kexec list. On 09/16/15 at 10:58am, yanjiang@windriver.com wrote: > From: Yanjiang Jin > > Function parse_crash_elf_headers() reads e_ident[EI_CLASS] then decides to > call parse_crash_elf64_headers() or parse_crash_elf32_headers(). > But this happens in run time, not compile time. So

Re: [PATCH] vmcore: replace Elf64_Ehdr/Elf32_Ehdr with elfhdr

Cc kexec list. On 09/16/15 at 10:58am, yanjiang@windriver.com wrote: > From: Yanjiang Jin > > Function parse_crash_elf_headers() reads e_ident[EI_CLASS] then decides to > call parse_crash_elf64_headers() or parse_crash_elf32_headers(). > But this happens in run

Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] Watchdog: introduce ARM SBSA watchdog driver

> >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 000..7ae45cc > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c > >> @@ -0,0 +1,459 @@ > >> +/* > >> + * SBSA(Server Base System Architecture) Generic Watchdog driver > >>

Re: [PATCH v7 2/8] ARM64: add SBSA Generic Watchdog device node in foundation-v8.dts

On 08/25/15 at 01:01am, fu@linaro.org wrote: > From: Fu Wei > > This can be a example of adding SBSA Generic Watchdog device node > into some dts files for the Soc which contains SBSA Generic Watchdog. > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann > Signed-off-by: Fu Wei > --- >

Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] Watchdog: introduce ARM SBSA watchdog driver

On 08/25/15 at 01:01am, fu@linaro.org wrote: > From: Fu Wei > > This driver bases on linux kernel watchdog framework, and > use "pretimeout" in the framework. It supports getting timeout and > pretimeout from parameter and FDT at the driver init stage. > In first timeout, the interrupt

Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] Watchdog: introduce ARM SBSA watchdog driver

> >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 000..7ae45cc > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c > >> @@ -0,0 +1,459 @@ > >> +/* > >> + * SBSA(Server Base System Architecture) Generic Watchdog driver > >>

Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] Watchdog: introduce ARM SBSA watchdog driver

On 08/25/15 at 01:01am, fu@linaro.org wrote: > From: Fu Wei > > This driver bases on linux kernel watchdog framework, and > use "pretimeout" in the framework. It supports getting timeout and > pretimeout from parameter and FDT at the driver init stage. > In first timeout,

Re: [PATCH v7 2/8] ARM64: add SBSA Generic Watchdog device node in foundation-v8.dts

On 08/25/15 at 01:01am, fu@linaro.org wrote: > From: Fu Wei > > This can be a example of adding SBSA Generic Watchdog device node > into some dts files for the Soc which contains SBSA Generic Watchdog. > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann > Signed-off-by: Fu Wei

Re: [PATCH] kexec: Add prefix "kexec" to output message

On 09/14/15 at 03:50pm, Minfei Huang wrote: > On 09/13/15 at 11:52am, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Minfei Huang writes: > > > > > kexec output message misses the prefix "kexec", when Dave Young split > > > the kexec code. To keep the same format, add

Re: [PATCH] kexec: Add prefix "kexec" to output message

On 09/14/15 at 03:50pm, Minfei Huang wrote: > On 09/13/15 at 11:52am, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Minfei Huang <mnfhu...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > kexec output message misses the prefix "kexec", when Dave Young split > > > the kexec cod

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drivers/base/node.c: skip non-present sections in register_mem_sect_under_node

On 08/27/15 at 04:43pm, Jan Stancek wrote: > Skip non-present sections in mem_blk to avoid crashing during boot > at register_mem_sect_under_node()->get_nid_for_pfn(): > > Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address > 0xf0080020 > Faulting instruction address:

Re: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/base/node.c: split loop in register_mem_sect_under_node

Ccing linux-mm On 08/27/15 at 04:43pm, Jan Stancek wrote: > Split single loop going over all pfn in mem_blk into 2 loops, > where outer loop goes over all sections and inner loop goes over > pfn from that section. > > This is preparatory patch for next patch: > "skip non-present sections in

Re: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/base/node.c: split loop in register_mem_sect_under_node

Ccing linux-mm On 08/27/15 at 04:43pm, Jan Stancek wrote: > Split single loop going over all pfn in mem_blk into 2 loops, > where outer loop goes over all sections and inner loop goes over > pfn from that section. > > This is preparatory patch for next patch: > "skip non-present sections in

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drivers/base/node.c: skip non-present sections in register_mem_sect_under_node

On 08/27/15 at 04:43pm, Jan Stancek wrote: > Skip non-present sections in mem_blk to avoid crashing during boot > at register_mem_sect_under_node()->get_nid_for_pfn(): > > Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address > 0xf0080020 > Faulting instruction address:

Re: [PATCH] x86/mm, efi: Check for valid image type

Hi, > > > As you pointed out above, a wild pointer could cause a > > WARN from early_ioremap. We need to never follow the pointer in the > > first place after a kexec, unless we have some way to know that it's > > actually valid. > > So you assume that the information from ACPI is always

Re: [PATCH] x86/mm, efi: Check for valid image type

Hi, As you pointed out above, a wild pointer could cause a WARN from early_ioremap. We need to never follow the pointer in the first place after a kexec, unless we have some way to know that it's actually valid. So you assume that the information from ACPI is always correct then?

Re: linux 4.2-rc1 broken Nokia N900

On 07/24/15 at 10:51am, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Fri 2015-07-24 16:18:09, Dave Young wrote: > > On 07/11/15 at 02:05pm, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > now I tested 4.2-rc1 release on Nokia N900 and couple of drivers are > > > broken and cau

Re: linux 4.2-rc1 broken Nokia N900

Hi, Pali On 07/24/15 at 10:40am, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Friday 24 July 2015 16:18:09 Dave Young wrote: > > On 07/11/15 at 02:05pm, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > now I tested 4.2-rc1 release on Nokia N900 and couple of drivers ar

Re: linux 4.2-rc1 broken Nokia N900

On 07/24/15 at 11:30am, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote: > > > On 24.07.2015 11:18, Dave Young wrote: > > >Pali, could you tell how do you test mainline kernel on n900? > > > >I used to use n900 as a usb dbgp gadget with a backport patch to > >2.6.28 so that I can ge

Re: linux 4.2-rc1 broken Nokia N900

On 07/11/15 at 02:05pm, Pali Rohár wrote: > Hello, > > now I tested 4.2-rc1 release on Nokia N900 and couple of drivers are > broken and cause kernel oops... > > Basically wifi, touchscreen and rtc drivers not working... > Pali, could you tell how do you test mainline kernel on n900? I used

Re: linux 4.2-rc1 broken Nokia N900

On 07/11/15 at 02:05pm, Pali Rohár wrote: Hello, now I tested 4.2-rc1 release on Nokia N900 and couple of drivers are broken and cause kernel oops... Basically wifi, touchscreen and rtc drivers not working... Pali, could you tell how do you test mainline kernel on n900? I used to use

Re: linux 4.2-rc1 broken Nokia N900

On 07/24/15 at 11:30am, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote: On 24.07.2015 11:18, Dave Young wrote: Pali, could you tell how do you test mainline kernel on n900? I used to use n900 as a usb dbgp gadget with a backport patch to 2.6.28 so that I can get early debug kernel message from my laptop. I

Re: linux 4.2-rc1 broken Nokia N900

Hi, Pali On 07/24/15 at 10:40am, Pali Rohár wrote: On Friday 24 July 2015 16:18:09 Dave Young wrote: On 07/11/15 at 02:05pm, Pali Rohár wrote: Hello, now I tested 4.2-rc1 release on Nokia N900 and couple of drivers are broken and cause kernel oops... Basically wifi

Re: linux 4.2-rc1 broken Nokia N900

On 07/24/15 at 10:51am, Pavel Machek wrote: On Fri 2015-07-24 16:18:09, Dave Young wrote: On 07/11/15 at 02:05pm, Pali Rohár wrote: Hello, now I tested 4.2-rc1 release on Nokia N900 and couple of drivers are broken and cause kernel oops... Basically wifi, touchscreen and rtc

Re: [PATCH 31/42] x86, efi: Copy SETUP_EFI data and access directly

Hi, On 07/07/15 at 01:20pm, Yinghai Lu wrote: > The copy will be in __initdata, and it is small. > > We can use pointer to access the setup_data instead of using early_memmap > everywhere. Looks good to me except one issue about missing checking memremap return value. see the comment inline >

Re: [PATCH 31/42] x86, efi: Copy SETUP_EFI data and access directly

Hi, On 07/07/15 at 01:20pm, Yinghai Lu wrote: The copy will be in __initdata, and it is small. We can use pointer to access the setup_data instead of using early_memmap everywhere. Looks good to me except one issue about missing checking memremap return value. see the comment inline Cc:

Re: [PATCH V2 2/2 update] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

On 07/22/15 at 10:19am, Dave Young wrote: > --- > > Update per comments from Vivek: > - Moved below functions which are used by kexec_load only to kexec.c > copy_user_segment_list() and kimage_alloc_init() > - add slab.h to kexec.c because kimage_alloc_init will call kfr

Re: [PATCH V2 2/2 update] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

general kernel code with to kexec_load syscall. Signed-off-by: Dave Young --- Update per comments from Vivek: - Moved below functions which are used by kexec_load only to kexec.c copy_user_segment_list() and kimage_alloc_init() - add slab.h to kexec.c because kimage_alloc_init will call kfree - drop

Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

On 07/21/15 at 09:03am, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 04:37:15PM +0800, dyo...@redhat.com wrote: > > Now there's two kexec load syscall, one is kexec_load another is > > kexec_file_load, kexec_file_load has been splited as kernel/kexec_file.c. > > In this patch I split kexec_load

Re: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel low memory reserving failed

On 07/21/15 at 03:50pm, Baoquan He wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On 07/21/15 at 03:31pm, Dave Young wrote: > > Hi, Baoquan > > > > The interface was introduced by Yinghai, ccing him. > > > > On 07/19/15 at 10:53pm, Baoquan He wrote: > > > People report

Re: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel low memory reserving failed

On 07/21/15 at 09:38am, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dave Young wrote: > > > Hi, Baoquan > > > > The interface was introduced by Yinghai, ccing him. > > Also, why was this syntax introduced in the first place? Why should the user > care?? The history i

Re: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel low memory reserving failed

Hi, Baoquan The interface was introduced by Yinghai, ccing him. On 07/19/15 at 10:53pm, Baoquan He wrote: > People reported that when allocating crashkernel memory using > ",high" and ",low" syntax, there were cases where the reservation > of the "high" portion succeeds, but the reservation of

Re: [PATCH V2 2/2 update] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

general kernel code with to kexec_load syscall. Signed-off-by: Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com --- Update per comments from Vivek: - Moved below functions which are used by kexec_load only to kexec.c copy_user_segment_list() and kimage_alloc_init() - add slab.h to kexec.c because kimage_alloc_init

Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

On 07/21/15 at 09:03am, Vivek Goyal wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 04:37:15PM +0800, dyo...@redhat.com wrote: Now there's two kexec load syscall, one is kexec_load another is kexec_file_load, kexec_file_load has been splited as kernel/kexec_file.c. In this patch I split kexec_load syscall

Re: [PATCH V2 2/2 update] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

On 07/22/15 at 10:19am, Dave Young wrote: --- Update per comments from Vivek: - Moved below functions which are used by kexec_load only to kexec.c copy_user_segment_list() and kimage_alloc_init() - add slab.h to kexec.c because kimage_alloc_init will call kfree - drop unused declaration

Re: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel low memory reserving failed

Hi, Baoquan The interface was introduced by Yinghai, ccing him. On 07/19/15 at 10:53pm, Baoquan He wrote: People reported that when allocating crashkernel memory using ,high and ,low syntax, there were cases where the reservation of the high portion succeeds, but the reservation of the low

Re: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel low memory reserving failed

On 07/21/15 at 03:50pm, Baoquan He wrote: Hi Dave, On 07/21/15 at 03:31pm, Dave Young wrote: Hi, Baoquan The interface was introduced by Yinghai, ccing him. On 07/19/15 at 10:53pm, Baoquan He wrote: People reported that when allocating crashkernel memory using ,high and ,low

Re: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel low memory reserving failed

On 07/21/15 at 09:38am, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com wrote: Hi, Baoquan The interface was introduced by Yinghai, ccing him. Also, why was this syntax introduced in the first place? Why should the user care?? The history is like below, I might miss something

Re: [PATCH 0/3] kexec: refactor CONFIG_KEXEC/CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE Kconfig

On 07/15/15 at 05:16pm, Dave Young wrote: > On 07/13/15 at 10:13am, Dave Young wrote: > > Previously Theodore Ts'o brought up an issue about kexec_load syscall > > bypassing > > signature verification: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/14/280 > > > > Beca

Re: [PATCH 0/3] kexec: refactor CONFIG_KEXEC/CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE Kconfig

On 07/13/15 at 10:13am, Dave Young wrote: > Previously Theodore Ts'o brought up an issue about kexec_load syscall > bypassing > signature verification: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/14/280 > > Because we have two kexec load syscall, one kexec_load, another > kexec_file_l

Re: [PATCH 0/3] kexec: refactor CONFIG_KEXEC/CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE Kconfig

On 07/15/15 at 05:16pm, Dave Young wrote: On 07/13/15 at 10:13am, Dave Young wrote: Previously Theodore Ts'o brought up an issue about kexec_load syscall bypassing signature verification: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/14/280 Because we have two kexec load syscall, one kexec_load

Re: [PATCH 0/3] kexec: refactor CONFIG_KEXEC/CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE Kconfig

On 07/13/15 at 10:13am, Dave Young wrote: Previously Theodore Ts'o brought up an issue about kexec_load syscall bypassing signature verification: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/14/280 Because we have two kexec load syscall, one kexec_load, another kexec_file_load, the latter one

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH 2/3] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

Hi, Geert On 07/14/15 at 11:47am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Dave Young wrote: > > On 07/14/15 at 11:16am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Dave Young wrote: > >> > On 07/14/15

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH 2/3] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

Hi, Geert On 07/14/15 at 11:16am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Dave Young wrote: > > On 07/14/15 at 10:50am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Dave Young wrote: > >> >> >

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH 2/3] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

On 07/14/15 at 10:50am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Dave Young wrote: > >> > diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig > >> > index 1c50210..20c48b3 100644 > >> > --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig >

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH 2/3] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

C_CORE, and let KEXEC selects > > KEXEC_CORE in arch Kconfig. Also updated general kernel code with > > to kexec_load syscall. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Young > > --- > > arch/arm/Kconfig |4 + > > arch/ia64/Kconfig |

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH 2/3] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

On 07/14/15 at 10:50am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: Hi Dave, On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com wrote: diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig index 1c50210..20c48b3 100644 --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig @@ -2001,10 +2001,14

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH 2/3] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

Hi, Geert On 07/14/15 at 11:16am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: Hi Dave, On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com wrote: On 07/14/15 at 10:50am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com wrote: diff --git a/arch/arm

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH 2/3] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

KEXEC_CORE, and let KEXEC selects KEXEC_CORE in arch Kconfig. Also updated general kernel code with to kexec_load syscall. Signed-off-by: Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com --- arch/arm/Kconfig |4 + arch/ia64/Kconfig |4 + arch/m68k/Kconfig |4

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH 2/3] kexec: split kexec_load syscall from kexec core code

Hi, Geert On 07/14/15 at 11:47am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: Hi Dave, On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com wrote: On 07/14/15 at 11:16am, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com wrote: On 07/14/15 at 10:50am

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/25/15 at 11:59am, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 04:48:18PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > On 06/19/15 at 09:09am, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:18:16PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > > > > If we want to disable uns

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/19/15 at 09:09am, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:18:16PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > > If we want to disable unsigned kernel loading at compile time, then we > > > > really need to work on decoupling CONFIG_KEXEC and CONFIG_FILE_KEXEC. > &g

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/25/15 at 11:59am, Vivek Goyal wrote: On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 04:48:18PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: On 06/19/15 at 09:09am, Vivek Goyal wrote: On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:18:16PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: If we want to disable unsigned kernel loading at compile time, then we

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/19/15 at 09:09am, Vivek Goyal wrote: On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:18:16PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: If we want to disable unsigned kernel loading at compile time, then we really need to work on decoupling CONFIG_KEXEC and CONFIG_FILE_KEXEC. Introducing another config option

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

> > If we want to disable unsigned kernel loading at compile time, then we > > really need to work on decoupling CONFIG_KEXEC and CONFIG_FILE_KEXEC. > > Introducing another config option is not the way forward, IMHO. > > Yes, let's do it in this way since everyone is fine with it. I will work on

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/16/15 at 09:47pm, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 08:32:37PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 02:38:31PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > >> > > >> Adding Vivek as he is the one who implemented kexec_file_load. > >

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/18/15 at 09:30am, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:02:09AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > [..] > > > Or simply add a new config option KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG_FORCE, so we can return > > > error in kexec_load and print some error message. > > &g

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/18/15 at 09:30am, Vivek Goyal wrote: On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:02:09AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: [..] Or simply add a new config option KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG_FORCE, so we can return error in kexec_load and print some error message. Just like below, does this work for you, Ted

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/16/15 at 09:47pm, Vivek Goyal wrote: On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 08:32:37PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Vivek Goyal vgo...@redhat.com writes: On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 02:38:31PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Adding Vivek as he is the one who implemented kexec_file_load. I

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

If we want to disable unsigned kernel loading at compile time, then we really need to work on decoupling CONFIG_KEXEC and CONFIG_FILE_KEXEC. Introducing another config option is not the way forward, IMHO. Yes, let's do it in this way since everyone is fine with it. I will work on a patch

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/18/15 at 09:16am, Dave Young wrote: > On 06/16/15 at 09:47pm, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 08:32:37PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 02:38:31PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/15/15 at 04:01pm, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:37:05AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > The bits that actually read Secure Boot state out of the UEFI > > variables, and apply protections to the machine to avoid compromise > > under the SB threat model. Things like disabling

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/16/15 at 09:47pm, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 08:32:37PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 02:38:31PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > >> > > >> Adding Vivek as he is the one who implemented kexec_file_load. > >

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/15/15 at 04:01pm, Theodore Ts'o wrote: On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:37:05AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: The bits that actually read Secure Boot state out of the UEFI variables, and apply protections to the machine to avoid compromise under the SB threat model. Things like disabling the

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/18/15 at 09:16am, Dave Young wrote: On 06/16/15 at 09:47pm, Vivek Goyal wrote: On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 08:32:37PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Vivek Goyal vgo...@redhat.com writes: On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 02:38:31PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Adding Vivek as he

Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification

On 06/16/15 at 09:47pm, Vivek Goyal wrote: On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 08:32:37PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Vivek Goyal vgo...@redhat.com writes: On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 02:38:31PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Adding Vivek as he is the one who implemented kexec_file_load. I

Re: [PATCH] kexec: Remove the unnecessary conditional judgement to simplify the code logic

> PAGE_SHIFT); > + image->control_page = hole_end; > break; > } > } > - if (pages) > - image->control_page = hole_end; > > return pages; > } Acked-by: Dave Young Thanks Dave -- T

Re: [PATCH] kexec: Remove the unnecessary conditional judgement to simplify the code logic

; break; } } - if (pages) - image-control_page = hole_end; return pages; } Acked-by: Dave Young dyo...@redhat.com Thanks Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message

Re: [PATCH v11 0/10] iommu/vt-d: Fix intel vt-d faults in kdump kernel

Hi, On 05/18/15 at 06:05pm, Li, ZhenHua wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > Testing from HP: passed. > Testing from He Baoquan(Redhat): passed > > The problem that dmar fault came again when running v10 with latest > kernel is fixed. > And I think there is no need to update the code to a new version now. >

Re: [PATCH v11 0/10] iommu/vt-d: Fix intel vt-d faults in kdump kernel

Hi, On 05/18/15 at 06:05pm, Li, ZhenHua wrote: Hi Joerg, Testing from HP: passed. Testing from He Baoquan(Redhat): passed The problem that dmar fault came again when running v10 with latest kernel is fixed. And I think there is no need to update the code to a new version now. So

Re: [PATCH v11 05/10] iommu/vt-d: Add functions to load and save old re

On 05/13/15 at 09:47am, Li, ZhenHua wrote: > On 05/12/2015 04:37 PM, Dave Young wrote: > >Seems the subject was truncated? Maybe "re" means root entry? Then please > >fix it > > > >On 05/11/15 at 05:52pm, Li, Zhen-Hua wrote: > >>Add functions to load

Re: [PATCH v11 02/10] iommu/vt-d: Items required for kdump

On 05/13/15 at 09:45am, Li, ZhenHua wrote: > On 05/12/2015 04:17 PM, Dave Young wrote: > >On 05/11/15 at 05:52pm, Li, Zhen-Hua wrote: > >>Add context entry functions needed for kdump. > >>+/* > >>+ * Fix Crashdump failure caused by leftover DMA through a

Re: [PATCH v11 05/10] iommu/vt-d: Add functions to load and save old re

On 05/13/15 at 09:47am, Li, ZhenHua wrote: On 05/12/2015 04:37 PM, Dave Young wrote: Seems the subject was truncated? Maybe re means root entry? Then please fix it On 05/11/15 at 05:52pm, Li, Zhen-Hua wrote: Add functions to load root entry table from old kernel, and to save updated root

Re: [PATCH v11 02/10] iommu/vt-d: Items required for kdump

On 05/13/15 at 09:45am, Li, ZhenHua wrote: On 05/12/2015 04:17 PM, Dave Young wrote: On 05/11/15 at 05:52pm, Li, Zhen-Hua wrote: Add context entry functions needed for kdump. +/* + * Fix Crashdump failure caused by leftover DMA through a hardware IOMMU + * + * Fixes the crashdump kernel

Re: [PATCH v11 0/10] iommu/vt-d: Fix intel vt-d faults in kdump kernel

On 05/11/15 at 05:52pm, Li, Zhen-Hua wrote: > This patchset is an update of Bill Sumner's patchset, implements a fix for: > If a kernel boots with intel_iommu=on on a system that supports intel vt-d, > when a panic happens, the kdump kernel will boot with these faults: > > dmar: DRHD:

Re: [PATCH v11 09/10] iommu/vt-d: Copy functions for irte

On 05/11/15 at 05:52pm, Li, Zhen-Hua wrote: > Functions to copy the irte data from the old kernel into the kdump kernel. Use above line as subject is better, if irte means interrupt remappin table entry then descripbe it then I like the long format in subject line. Also it need a better patch

<    6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   >