[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] libacpi: Prevent CPU hotplug AML from corrupting memory


  • To: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.garciavallejo@xxxxxxx>
  • From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 08:40:43 +0200
  • Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
  • Cc: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Grygorii Strashko <grygorii_strashko@xxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 06:40:58 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 11.09.2025 18:23, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
> CPU hotplug relies on the online CPU bitmap being provided on PIO 0xaf00
> by the device model. The GPE handler checks this and compares it against
> the "online" flag on each MADT LAPIC entry, setting the flag to its
> related bit in the bitmap and adjusting the table's checksum.
> 
> The bytecode doesn't, however, stop at NCPUS. It keeps comparing until it
> reaches 128, even if that overflows the MADT into some other (hopefully
> mapped) memory. The reading isn't as problematic as the writing though.
> 
> If an "entry" outside the MADT is deemed to disagree with the CPU bitmap
> then the bit where the "online" flag would be is flipped, thus
> corrupting that memory. And the MADT checksum gets adjusted for a flip
> that happened outside its range. It's all terrible.
> 
> Note that this corruption happens regardless of the device-model being
> present or not, because even if the bitmap holds 0s, the overflowed
> memory might not at the bits corresponding to the "online" flag.
> 
> This patch adjusts the DSDT so entries >=NCPUS are skipped.
> 
> Fixes: 087543338924("hvmloader: limit CPUs exposed to guests")
> Reported-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii_strashko@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.garciavallejo@xxxxxxx>

In principle:
Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>

However, ...

> --- a/tools/libacpi/mk_dsdt.c
> +++ b/tools/libacpi/mk_dsdt.c
> @@ -231,6 +231,20 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>      stmt("Store", "ToBuffer(PRS), Local0");
>      for ( cpu = 0; cpu < max_cpus; cpu++ )
>      {
> +        if ( cpu )
> +        {
> +            /*
> +             * Check if we're still within the MADT bounds
> +             *
> +             * LLess() takes one byte, but LLessEqual() takes two. Increase
> +             * `cpu` by 1, so we can avoid it. It does add up once you do it
> +             * 127 times!
> +             */
> +            push_block("If", "LLess(\\_SB.NCPU, %d)", 1 + cpu);
> +            stmt("Return", "One");

... if you already care about size bloat in the conditional, why are the two
bytes per instance that this extra return requires not relevant? They too
add up, and they can be avoided by wrapping the If around the rest of the
code. I didn't count it, but I expect the If encoding to grow by at most one
byte, perhaps none at all.

Jan

> +            pop_block();
> +        }
> +
>          /* Read a byte at a time from the PRST online-CPU bitmask. */
>          if ( (cpu & 7) == 0 )
>              stmt("Store", "DerefOf(Index(Local0, %u)), Local1", cpu/8);




 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.