On 8/28/24 10:14 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 at 19:09, kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Ross,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on tip/x86/core]
[also build test WARNING on char-misc/char-misc-testing char-misc/char-misc-next char-misc/char-misc-linus herbert-cryptodev-2.6/master efi/next linus/master v6.11-rc5]
[cannot apply to herbert-crypto-2.6/master next-20240828]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch*_base_tree_information__;Iw!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!KhkZK77BXRIR4F24tKkUeIlIrdqXtUW2vcnDV74c_5BmrQBQaQ4FqcDKKv9LB3HQUocTGkrmIxuz-LAC$ ]
url: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Ross-Philipson/Documentation-x86-Secure-Launch-kernel-documentation/20240827-065225__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!KhkZK77BXRIR4F24tKkUeIlIrdqXtUW2vcnDV74c_5BmrQBQaQ4FqcDKKv9LB3HQUocTGkrmI7Z6SQKy$
base: tip/x86/core
patch link: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240826223835.3928819-21-ross.philipson*40oracle.com__;JQ!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!KhkZK77BXRIR4F24tKkUeIlIrdqXtUW2vcnDV74c_5BmrQBQaQ4FqcDKKv9LB3HQUocTGkrmIzWfs1XZ$
patch subject: [PATCH v10 20/20] x86/efi: EFI stub DRTM launch support for Secure Launch
config: i386-randconfig-062-20240828 (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240829/202408290030.FEbUhHbr-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!KhkZK77BXRIR4F24tKkUeIlIrdqXtUW2vcnDV74c_5BmrQBQaQ4FqcDKKv9LB3HQUocTGkrmIwkYG0TY$ )
This is a i386 32-bit build, which makes no sense: this stuff should
just declare 'depends on 64BIT'
Our config entry already has 'depends on X86_64' which in turn depends
on 64BIT. I would think that would be enough. Do you think it needs an
explicit 'depends on 64BIT' in our entry as well?
Thanks
Ross
compiler: clang version 18.1.5 (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!KhkZK77BXRIR4F24tKkUeIlIrdqXtUW2vcnDV74c_5BmrQBQaQ4FqcDKKv9LB3HQUocTGkrmI2SDLdTN$ 617a15a9eac96088ae5e9134248d8236e34b91b1)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240829/202408290030.FEbUhHbr-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/reproduce__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!KhkZK77BXRIR4F24tKkUeIlIrdqXtUW2vcnDV74c_5BmrQBQaQ4FqcDKKv9LB3HQUocTGkrmI5MJDdIG$ )
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
| Closes: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202408290030.FEbUhHbr-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!KhkZK77BXRIR4F24tKkUeIlIrdqXtUW2vcnDV74c_5BmrQBQaQ4FqcDKKv9LB3HQUocTGkrmI-MitiqR$
sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c:945:41: sparse: sparse: non size-preserving pointer to integer cast
drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c:953:65: sparse: sparse: non size-preserving pointer to integer cast
drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c:980:70: sparse: sparse: non size-preserving integer to pointer cast
drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c:1014:45: sparse: sparse: non size-preserving integer to pointer cast
vim +945 drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c
927
928 static bool efi_secure_launch_update_boot_params(struct slr_table *slrt,
929 struct boot_params *boot_params)
930 {
931 struct slr_entry_intel_info *txt_info;
932 struct slr_entry_policy *policy;
933 struct txt_os_mle_data *os_mle;
934 bool updated = false;
935 int i;
936
937 txt_info = slr_next_entry_by_tag(slrt, NULL, SLR_ENTRY_INTEL_INFO);
938 if (!txt_info)
939 return false;
940
941 os_mle = txt_os_mle_data_start((void *)txt_info->txt_heap);
942 if (!os_mle)
943 return false;
944
> 945 os_mle->boot_params_addr = (u64)boot_params;
946
947 policy = slr_next_entry_by_tag(slrt, NULL, SLR_ENTRY_ENTRY_POLICY);
948 if (!policy)
949 return false;
950
951 for (i = 0; i < policy->nr_entries; i++) {
952 if (policy->policy_entries[i].entity_type == SLR_ET_BOOT_PARAMS) {
953 policy->policy_entries[i].entity = (u64)boot_params;
954 updated = true;
955 break;
956 }
957 }
958
959 /*
960 * If this is a PE entry into EFI stub the mocked up boot params will
961 * be missing some of the setup header data needed for the second stage
962 * of the Secure Launch boot.
963 */
964 if (image) {
965 struct setup_header *hdr = (struct setup_header *)((u8 *)image->image_base +
966 offsetof(struct boot_params, hdr));
967 u64 cmdline_ptr;
968
969 boot_params->hdr.setup_sects = hdr->setup_sects;
970 boot_params->hdr.syssize = hdr->syssize;
971 boot_params->hdr.version = hdr->version;
972 boot_params->hdr.loadflags = hdr->loadflags;
973 boot_params->hdr.kernel_alignment = hdr->kernel_alignment;
974 boot_params->hdr.min_alignment = hdr->min_alignment;
975 boot_params->hdr.xloadflags = hdr->xloadflags;
976 boot_params->hdr.init_size = hdr->init_size;
977 boot_params->hdr.kernel_info_offset = hdr->kernel_info_offset;
978 efi_set_u64_form(boot_params->hdr.cmd_line_ptr, boot_params->ext_cmd_line_ptr,
979 &cmdline_ptr);
> 980 boot_params->hdr.cmdline_size = strlen((const char *)cmdline_ptr);
981 }
982
983 return updated;
984 }
985
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!KhkZK77BXRIR4F24tKkUeIlIrdqXtUW2vcnDV74c_5BmrQBQaQ4FqcDKKv9LB3HQUocTGkrmIy5kGTJf$
