Files
system76-coreboot/Documentation/security/memory_clearing.md
Nicholas Chin 35599f9a66 Docs: Replace Recommonmark with MyST Parser
Recommonmark has been deprecated since 2021 [1] and the last release was
over 3 years ago [2]. As per their announcement, Markedly Structured
Text (MyST) Parser [3] is the recommended replacement.

For the most part, the existing documentation is compatible with MyST,
as both parsers are built around the CommonMark flavor of Markdown. The
main difference that affects coreboot is how the Sphinx toctree is
generated. Recommonmark has a feature called auto_toc_tree, which
converts single level lists of references into a toctree:

* [Part 1: Starting from scratch](part1.md)
* [Part 2: Submitting a patch to coreboot.org](part2.md)
* [Part 3: Writing unit tests](part3.md)
* [Managing local additions](managing_local_additions.md)
* [Flashing firmware](flashing_firmware/index.md)

MyST Parser does not provide a replacement for this feature, meaning the
toctree must be defined manually. This is done using MyST's syntax for
Sphinx directives:

```{toctree}
:maxdepth: 1

Part 1: Starting from scratch <part1.md>
Part 2: Submitting a patch to coreboot.org <part2.md>
Part 3: Writing unit tests <part3.md>
Managing local additions <managing_local_additions.md>
Flashing firmware <flashing_firmware/index.md>
```

Internally, auto_toc_tree essentially converts lists of references into
the Sphinx toctree structure that the MyST syntax above more directly
represents.

The toctrees were converted to the MyST syntax using the following
command and Python script:

`find ./ -iname "*.md" | xargs -n 1 python conv_toctree.py`

```
import re
import sys

in_list = False
f = open(sys.argv[1])
lines = f.readlines()
f.close()

with open(sys.argv[1], "w") as f:
    for line in lines:
        match = re.match(r"^[-*+] \[(.*)\]\((.*)\)$", line)
        if match is not None:
            if not in_list:
                in_list = True
                f.write("```{toctree}\n")
                f.write(":maxdepth: 1\n\n")
            f.write(match.group(1) + " <" + match.group(2) + ">\n")
        else:
            if in_list:
                f.write("```\n")
            f.write(line)
            in_list = False

    if in_list:
        f.write("```\n")
```

While this does add a little more work for creating the toctree, this
does give more control over exactly what goes into the toctree. For
instance, lists of links to external resources currently end up in the
toctree, but we may want to limit it to pages within coreboot.

This change does break rendering and navigation of the documentation in
applications that can render Markdown, such as Okular, Gitiles, or the
GitHub mirror. Assuming the docs are mainly intended to be viewed after
being rendered to doc.coreboot.org, this is probably not an issue in
practice.

Another difference is that MyST natively supports Markdown tables,
whereas with Recommonmark, tables had to be written in embedded rST [4].
However, MyST also supports embedded rST, so the existing tables can be
easily converted as the syntax is nearly identical.

These were converted using
`find ./ -iname "*.md" | xargs -n 1 sed -i "s/eval_rst/{eval-rst}/"`

Makefile.sphinx and conf.py were regenerated from scratch by running
`sphinx-quickstart` using the updated version of Sphinx, which removes a
lot of old commented out boilerplate. Any relevant changes coreboot had
made on top of the previous autogenerated versions of these files were
ported over to the newly generated file.

From some initial testing the generated webpages appear and function
identically to the existing documentation built with Recommonmark.

TEST: `make -C util/docker docker-build-docs` builds the documentation
successfully and the generated output renders properly when viewed in
a web browser.

[1] https://github.com/readthedocs/recommonmark/issues/221
[2] https://pypi.org/project/recommonmark/
[3] https://myst-parser.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
[4] https://doc.coreboot.org/getting_started/writing_documentation.html

Change-Id: I0837c1722fa56d25c9441ea218e943d8f3d9b804
Signed-off-by: Nicholas Chin <nic.c3.14@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/73158
Reviewed-by: Matt DeVillier <matt.devillier@gmail.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
2024-03-21 16:11:56 +00:00

1.6 KiB

Memory clearing

The main memory on computer platforms in high security environments contains sensible data. On unexpected reboot the data might persist and could be read by a malicious application in the bootflow or userspace.

In order to prevent leaking information from pre-reset, the boot firmware can clear the main system memory on boot, wiping all information.

A common API indicates if the main memory has to be cleared. That could be on user request or by a Trusted Execution Environment indicating that secrets are in memory.

As every platform has different bring-up mechanisms and memory-layouts, every The device must indicate support for memory clearing as part of the boot process.

Requirements

  1. The platform must clear all platform memory (DRAM) if requested
  2. Code that is placed in DRAM might be skipped (as workaround)
  3. Stack that is placed in DRAM might be skipped (as workaround)
  4. All DRAM is cleared with zeros

Implementation

A platform that supports memory clearing selects Kconfig PLATFORM_HAS_DRAM_CLEAR and calls

bool security_clear_dram_request(void);

to detect if memory should be cleared.

The memory is cleared in ramstage as part of DEV_INIT stage. It's possible to clear it earlier on some platforms, but on x86 MTRRs needs to be programmed first, which happens in DEV_INIT.

Without MTRRs (and caches enabled) clearing memory takes multiple seconds.

Exceptions

As some platforms place code and stack in DRAM (FSP1.0), the regions can be skipped.

Architecture specific implementations

:maxdepth: 1

x86 PAE <../arch/x86/pae.md>