Re: static data in dxe_runtime modules

Laszlo Ersek

On 08/13/19 13:23, Roman Kagan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 11:10:27AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
On 08/12/19 20:43, Roman Kagan wrote:
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 04:07:00PM +0000, Roman Kagan via Groups.Io wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 07:39:14PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
On 08/07/19 19:41, Andrew Fish wrote:
On Aug 7, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Laszlo Ersek <lersek@...> wrote:
On 08/05/19 12:18, Roman Kagan wrote:
On Sat, Aug 03, 2019 at 04:03:04AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek via Groups.Io wrote:
On 08/01/19 21:16, Roman Kagan wrote:
I'm convinced that OpenSSL needs to expose a new API for this particular
Since, as you point out below, the problem only affects the essentially
broken configuration (SECURE_BOOT_ENABLE && !SMM_REQUIRE), I'm fine with
saving time and effort and sticking to the hack-ish approach proposed in
the bugzilla issue, which is to iterate over "thread-local" pointers and
EfiConvertPointer() on each. (As long as it fixes the problem of
course; I'll test and report back.)
It doesn't :( It just gets slightly further and hits another static
pointer variable which is not part of the thread-local array:


this one uses a few static pointer variables that are also initialized
on demand and become stale upon SetVirtualAddressMap().
So it looks like the issue can't be solved without making OpenSSL aware
of this use case.
Is reloading the module from scratch ruled out completely?
Not my place to say authoritatively, but:
- it would be a first, as much as I can say,
- it would duplicate (in purpose) an existing facility.

Personally I'd expect it to be rejected, but it's not up to me. If
you're willing to "build one to (possibly) throw away", that could be
the most direct way to get authoritative (= maintainer) feedback.


I'd try to cook up a patch for that unless there's a strong no-go.


Join to automatically receive all group messages.