[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] x86/efi: avoid a relocation in efi_arch_post_exit_boot()
- To: Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 12:23:54 +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: "Daniel P. Smith" <dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Wed, 02 Apr 2025 10:24:01 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 01.04.2025 15:08, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> Instead of using the absolute __start_xen address, calculate it as an
> offset from the current instruction pointer. The relocation would be
> problematic if the loader has acknowledged the Xen image section
> attributes, and mapped .init.text with just read and execute permissions.
Fine in principle, but ...
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h
> @@ -266,7 +266,9 @@ static void __init noreturn efi_arch_post_exit_boot(void)
>
> /* Jump to higher mappings. */
> "mov stack_start(%%rip), %%rsp\n\t"
> - "movabs $__start_xen, %[rip]\n\t"
> + "lea __start_xen(%%rip), %[rip]\n\t"
> + "add %[offset], %[rip]\n\t"
> +
> "push %[cs]\n\t"
> "push %[rip]\n\t"
> "lretq"
> @@ -274,7 +276,8 @@ static void __init noreturn efi_arch_post_exit_boot(void)
> [cr4] "+&r" (cr4)
> : [cr3] "r" (idle_pg_table),
> [cs] "i" (__HYPERVISOR_CS),
> - [ds] "r" (__HYPERVISOR_DS)
> + [ds] "r" (__HYPERVISOR_DS),
> + [offset] "r" (__XEN_VIRT_START - xen_phys_start)
> : "memory" );
> unreachable();
> }
... imo ought to come with a brief comment, to keep people from trying to
undo ("simplify") that again.
[offset]'s constraint could in principle be "rme", I think, as [rip] is
"&r" already. Just that the compiler (at least gcc) won't synthesize a
memory operand, and the value can't be expressed by an immediate. IOW -
probably all fine with just "r". Of course if/when we add further operands
here, we need to pay attention to the number of registers needed.
Jan
|