Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1399502
| From | Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC/PATCHv3 v3 3/3] firmware: Support loading into a pre-allocated buffer |
| Date | 2016-05-11 22:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rxJeW-7wL-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rxok9-3qI-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rxoka-3qI-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <rxBKr-8nL-35@gated-at.bofh.it> <rxJeW-7wL-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed, 2016-05-11 at 13:22 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Mimi Zohar (2016-05-11 05:41:52)
> > Hi Stephen,
> >
> > On Tue, 2016-05-10 at 15:26 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >
> > > -static int fw_get_filesystem_firmware(struct device *device,
> > > - struct firmware_buf *buf)
> > > +static int
> > > +fw_get_filesystem_firmware(struct device *device, struct firmware_buf *buf)
> > > {
> > > loff_t size;
> > > int i, len;
> > > int rc = -ENOENT;
> > > char *path;
> > > + enum kernel_read_file_id id = READING_FIRMWARE;
> > > + size_t msize = INT_MAX;
> > > +
> > > + /* Already populated data member means we're loading into a buffer */
> > > + if (buf->data) {
> > > + id = READING_FIRMWARE_INTO_BUF;
> >
> > In both cases we're reading the firmware into a buffer. In this case,
> > it is pre-allocated. Other than it being pre-allocated, is there
> > anything special about this buffer?
>
> No. I'm not sure what you're asking/implying.
>
> > There has to be a more appropriate
> > string identifier.
>
> Ok. Any suggestions? The point of the new id is so that we know if we
> need to allocate the buffer or not in kernel_read_file().
If you're still using DMA, then perhaps "READING_FIRMWARE_DMA". If the
only difference is that the buffer is pre-allocated, then maybe
"READING_FIRMWARE_PREALLOC_BUFFER".
> Alternatively
> we could indicate that by a NULL *buf pointer, but it seems that half
> the time that's not initialized to NULL so it didn't seem safe to rely
> on that fact or update the callsites appropriately.
Assuming that the pre-allocated buffer is smaller than the firmware
size, then a new name definitely needs to be specified, so that the
firmware signature can be verified on the security_kernel_read_file()
hook, as opposed to the security_kernel_post_read_file() hook. The
patch would look something like:
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
index 68b26c3..c799459 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
@@ -359,6 +359,10 @@ int ima_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id read_id)
#endif
return 0; /* We rely on module signature checking */
}
+
+ if (file && read_id == READING_FIRMWARE_INTO_BUF)
+ return process_measurement(file, NULL, 0, MAY_READ,
+ FIRMWARE_CHECK, 0);
return 0;
}
@@ -404,6 +408,9 @@ int ima_post_read_file(struct file *file, void *buf, loff_t size,
return 0;
}
+ if (file && read_id == READING_FIRMWARE_INTO_BUF)
+ return 0;
+
func = read_idmap[read_id] ?: FILE_CHECK;
return process_measurement(file, buf, size, MAY_READ, func, 0);
}
Once we've decided on a more appropriate identifier string, I'll post
the patch.
Mimi
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC/PATCHv3 v3 0/3] request_firmware() into pre-allocated buffers Stephen Boyd <stephen.boyd@linaro.org> - 2016-05-11 00:30 +0200
[RFC/PATCHv3 v3 3/3] firmware: Support loading into a pre-allocated buffer Stephen Boyd <stephen.boyd@linaro.org> - 2016-05-11 00:30 +0200
Re: [RFC/PATCHv3 v3 3/3] firmware: Support loading into a pre-allocated buffer Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-05-11 14:50 +0200
Re: [RFC/PATCHv3 v3 3/3] firmware: Support loading into a pre-allocated buffer Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-05-11 22:50 +0200
[RFC/PATCHv3 v3 1/3] firmware: Consolidate kmap/read/write logic Stephen Boyd <stephen.boyd@linaro.org> - 2016-05-11 00:30 +0200
csiph-web