lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 11/18] Hibernate: introduced RSA key-pair to verify signature of snapshot
On Thu, 22 Aug, at 07:01:50PM, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> +static int efi_status_to_err(efi_status_t status)
> +{
> + int err;
> +
> + switch (status) {
> + case EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER:
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + case EFI_OUT_OF_RESOURCES:
> + err = -ENOSPC;
> + break;
> + case EFI_DEVICE_ERROR:
> + err = -EIO;
> + break;
> + case EFI_WRITE_PROTECTED:
> + err = -EROFS;
> + break;
> + case EFI_SECURITY_VIOLATION:
> + err = -EACCES;
> + break;
> + case EFI_NOT_FOUND:
> + err = -ENODATA;
> + break;
> + default:
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + return err;
> +}

Please don't reimplement this. Instead make the existing function
global.

[...]

> +static void *load_wake_key_data(unsigned long *datasize)
> +{
> + u32 attr;
> + void *wkey_data;
> + efi_status_t status;
> +
> + if (!efi_enabled(EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES))
> + return ERR_PTR(-EPERM);
> +
> + /* obtain the size */
> + *datasize = 0;
> + status = efi.get_variable(EFI_S4_WAKE_KEY_NAME, &EFI_HIBERNATE_GUID,
> + NULL, datasize, NULL);
> + if (status != EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL) {
> + wkey_data = ERR_PTR(efi_status_to_err(status));
> + pr_err("PM: Couldn't get wake key data size: 0x%lx\n", status);
> + goto error;
> + }

Is it safe to completely bypass the efivars interface and access
efi.get_variable() directly? I wouldn't have thought so, unless you can
guarantee that the kernel isn't going to access any of the EFI runtime
services while you execute this function.

--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-05 11:21    [W:0.402 / U:0.896 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site