linux-kernel - [ 12/27] x86, fpu: Avoid FPU lazy restore after suspend

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20121207005829.192265076@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:	Thu,  6 Dec 2012 16:58:56 -0800
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>,
	Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@...omium.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olofj@...omium.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [ 12/27] x86, fpu: Avoid FPU lazy restore after suspend

3.6-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>

commit 644c154186386bb1fa6446bc5e037b9ed098db46 upstream.

When a cpu enters S3 state, the FPU state is lost.
After resuming for S3, if we try to lazy restore the FPU for a process running
on the same CPU, this will result in a corrupted FPU context.

Ensure that "fpu_owner_task" is properly invalided when (re-)initializing a CPU,
so nobody will try to lazy restore a state which doesn't exist in the hardware.

Tested with a 64-bit kernel on a 4-core Ivybridge CPU with eagerfpu=off,
by doing thousands of suspend/resume cycles with 4 processes doing FPU
operations running. Without the patch, a process is killed after a
few hundreds cycles by a SIGFPE.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>
Cc: Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@...omium.org>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olofj@...omium.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1354306532-1014-1-git-send-email-vpalatin@chromium.org
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 arch/x86/include/asm/fpu-internal.h |   15 +++++++++------
 arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c           |    5 +++++
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/fpu-internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/fpu-internal.h
@@ -334,14 +334,17 @@ static inline void __thread_fpu_begin(st
 typedef struct { int preload; } fpu_switch_t;
 
 /*
- * FIXME! We could do a totally lazy restore, but we need to
- * add a per-cpu "this was the task that last touched the FPU
- * on this CPU" variable, and the task needs to have a "I last
- * touched the FPU on this CPU" and check them.
+ * Must be run with preemption disabled: this clears the fpu_owner_task,
+ * on this CPU.
  *
- * We don't do that yet, so "fpu_lazy_restore()" always returns
- * false, but some day..
+ * This will disable any lazy FPU state restore of the current FPU state,
+ * but if the current thread owns the FPU, it will still be saved by.
  */
+static inline void __cpu_disable_lazy_restore(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+	per_cpu(fpu_owner_task, cpu) = NULL;
+}
+
 static inline int fpu_lazy_restore(struct task_struct *new, unsigned int cpu)
 {
 	return new == this_cpu_read_stable(fpu_owner_task) &&
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -68,6 +68,8 @@
 #include <asm/mwait.h>
 #include <asm/apic.h>
 #include <asm/io_apic.h>
+#include <asm/i387.h>
+#include <asm/fpu-internal.h>
 #include <asm/setup.h>
 #include <asm/uv/uv.h>
 #include <linux/mc146818rtc.h>
@@ -817,6 +819,9 @@ int __cpuinit native_cpu_up(unsigned int
 
 	per_cpu(cpu_state, cpu) = CPU_UP_PREPARE;
 
+	/* the FPU context is blank, nobody can own it */
+	__cpu_disable_lazy_restore(cpu);
+
 	err = do_boot_cpu(apicid, cpu, tidle);
 	if (err) {
 		pr_debug("do_boot_cpu failed %d\n", err);


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/