[V3] efi: pstore: Add module parameter for setting the record size

By default, the efi-pstore backend hardcode the UEFI variable size
as 1024 bytes. The historical reasons for that were discussed by
Ard in threads [0][1]:

"there is some cargo cult from prehistoric EFI times going
on here, it seems. Or maybe just misinterpretation of the maximum
size for the variable *name* vs the variable itself.".

"OVMF has
OvmfPkg/OvmfPkgX64.dsc:
gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaxVariableSize|0x2000
OvmfPkg/OvmfPkgX64.dsc:
gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaxVariableSize|0x8400

where the first one is without secure boot and the second with secure
boot. Interestingly, the default is

gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaxVariableSize|0x400

so this is probably where this 1k number comes from."

With that, and since there is not such a limit in the UEFI spec, we
have the confidence to hereby add a module parameter to enable advanced
users to change the UEFI record size for efi-pstore data collection,
this way allowing a much easier reading of the collected log, which
wouldn't be scattered anymore among many small files.

Through empirical analysis we observed that extreme low values (like 8
bytes) could eventually cause writing issues, so given that and the OVMF
default discussed, we limited the minimum value to 1024 bytes, which also
is still the default.

[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAMj1kXF4UyRMh2Y_KakeNBHvkHhTtavASTAxXinDO1rhPe_wYg@mail.gmail.com/
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAMj1kXFy-2KddGu+dgebAdU9v2sindxVoiHLWuVhqYw+R=kqng@mail.gmail.com/

Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com>
---

V3:
- Stick with 1024 to the varname size (thanks Ard!).
- Rebased to v6.1-rc3.


Hey folks, I've tested multiple record_size values, using lz4, zstd, deflate
and no compression. For smaller ones ( up to 4k), all cases worked (for
deflate, there was some failures even with 1024, and even with this patch
reverted). For bigger sizes, no compression/deflate fails for 8k+, lz4 for
values bigger than 16k and zstd only for values more then 20k.

I've instrumented the function efivar_set_variable_locked() to get the return
value during panic, and when it fails, usually it gives 0x8000000000000002
(EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER it seems?). It's not related to this patch specifically,
but worth mentioning in case you have ideas.

Thanks,


Guilherme


 drivers/firmware/efi/efi-pstore.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

On Tue, 1 Nov 2022 at 19:48, Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com> wrote:
>
> By default, the efi-pstore backend hardcode the UEFI variable size
> as 1024 bytes. The historical reasons for that were discussed by
> Ard in threads [0][1]:
>
> "there is some cargo cult from prehistoric EFI times going
> on here, it seems. Or maybe just misinterpretation of the maximum
> size for the variable *name* vs the variable itself.".
>
> "OVMF has
> OvmfPkg/OvmfPkgX64.dsc:
> gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaxVariableSize|0x2000
> OvmfPkg/OvmfPkgX64.dsc:
> gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaxVariableSize|0x8400
>
> where the first one is without secure boot and the second with secure
> boot. Interestingly, the default is
>
> gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaxVariableSize|0x400
>
> so this is probably where this 1k number comes from."
>
> With that, and since there is not such a limit in the UEFI spec, we
> have the confidence to hereby add a module parameter to enable advanced
> users to change the UEFI record size for efi-pstore data collection,
> this way allowing a much easier reading of the collected log, which
> wouldn't be scattered anymore among many small files.
>
> Through empirical analysis we observed that extreme low values (like 8
> bytes) could eventually cause writing issues, so given that and the OVMF
> default discussed, we limited the minimum value to 1024 bytes, which also
> is still the default.
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAMj1kXF4UyRMh2Y_KakeNBHvkHhTtavASTAxXinDO1rhPe_wYg@mail.gmail.com/
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAMj1kXFy-2KddGu+dgebAdU9v2sindxVoiHLWuVhqYw+R=kqng@mail.gmail.com/
>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com>

Thanks, I'll queue this up for v6.2

> ---
>
> V3:
> - Stick with 1024 to the varname size (thanks Ard!).
> - Rebased to v6.1-rc3.
>
>
> Hey folks, I've tested multiple record_size values, using lz4, zstd, deflate
> and no compression. For smaller ones ( up to 4k), all cases worked (for
> deflate, there was some failures even with 1024, and even with this patch
> reverted). For bigger sizes, no compression/deflate fails for 8k+, lz4 for
> values bigger than 16k and zstd only for values more then 20k.
>
> I've instrumented the function efivar_set_variable_locked() to get the return
> value during panic, and when it fails, usually it gives 0x8000000000000002
> (EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER it seems?). It's not related to this patch specifically,
> but worth mentioning in case you have ideas.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Guilherme
>
>
>  drivers/firmware/efi/efi-pstore.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi-pstore.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi-pstore.c
> index 3bddc152fcd4..81ed4fc6d76d 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi-pstore.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi-pstore.c
> @@ -10,7 +10,9 @@ MODULE_IMPORT_NS(EFIVAR);
>
>  #define DUMP_NAME_LEN 66
>
> -#define EFIVARS_DATA_SIZE_MAX 1024
> +static unsigned int record_size = 1024;
> +module_param(record_size, uint, 0444);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(record_size, "size of each pstore UEFI var (in bytes, min/default=1024)");
>
>  static bool efivars_pstore_disable =
>         IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI_VARS_PSTORE_DEFAULT_DISABLE);
> @@ -30,7 +32,7 @@ static int efi_pstore_open(struct pstore_info *psi)
>         if (err)
>                 return err;
>
> -       psi->data = kzalloc(EFIVARS_DATA_SIZE_MAX, GFP_KERNEL);
> +       psi->data = kzalloc(record_size, GFP_KERNEL);
>         if (!psi->data)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
>
> @@ -52,7 +54,7 @@ static inline u64 generic_id(u64 timestamp, unsigned int part, int count)
>  static int efi_pstore_read_func(struct pstore_record *record,
>                                 efi_char16_t *varname)
>  {
> -       unsigned long wlen, size = EFIVARS_DATA_SIZE_MAX;
> +       unsigned long wlen, size = record_size;
>         char name[DUMP_NAME_LEN], data_type;
>         efi_status_t status;
>         int cnt;
> @@ -133,7 +135,7 @@ static ssize_t efi_pstore_read(struct pstore_record *record)
>         efi_status_t status;
>
>         for (;;) {
> -               varname_size = EFIVARS_DATA_SIZE_MAX;
> +               varname_size = 1024;
>
>                 /*
>                  * If this is the first read() call in the pstore enumeration,
> @@ -224,11 +226,20 @@ static __init int efivars_pstore_init(void)
>         if (efivars_pstore_disable)
>                 return 0;
>
> -       efi_pstore_info.buf = kmalloc(4096, GFP_KERNEL);
> +       /*
> +        * Notice that 1024 is the minimum here to prevent issues with
> +        * decompression algorithms that were spotted during tests;
> +        * even in the case of not using compression, smaller values would
> +        * just pollute more the pstore FS with many small collected files.
> +        */
> +       if (record_size < 1024)
> +               record_size = 1024;
> +
> +       efi_pstore_info.buf = kmalloc(record_size, GFP_KERNEL);
>         if (!efi_pstore_info.buf)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
>
> -       efi_pstore_info.bufsize = 1024;
> +       efi_pstore_info.bufsize = record_size;
>
>         if (pstore_register(&efi_pstore_info)) {
>                 kfree(efi_pstore_info.buf);
> --
> 2.38.0
>

On 03/11/2022 14:04, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> [...]
> Thanks, I'll queue this up for v6.2

Thanks a lot for all the discussions Ard, it was very informative =)

On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 at 19:38, Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com> wrote:
>
> On 03/11/2022 14:04, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > [...]
> > Thanks, I'll queue this up for v6.2
>
> Thanks a lot for all the discussions Ard, it was very informative =)

My pleasure