linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] MIPS: Remote processor driver

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: <b06e60b3-6175-db52-1cc8-706a4d3a04f0@imgtec.com>
Date:   Wed, 9 Nov 2016 13:30:18 +0000
From:   Matt Redfearn <matt.redfearn@...tec.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:     Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>, <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
        <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lisa Parratt <lisa.parratt@...tec.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Qais Yousef <qsyousef@...il.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] MIPS: Remote processor driver

Hi Thomas,

On 09/11/16 10:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Nov 2016, Matt Redfearn wrote:
>> The MIPS remote processor driver allows non-Linux firmware to take
>> control of and execute on one of the systems VPEs. The CPU must be
>> offlined from Linux first. A sysfs interface is created which allows
>> firmware to be loaded and changed at runtime. A full description is
>> available at [1]. An example firmware that can be used with this driver
>> is available at [2].
>>
>> This is useful to allow running bare metal code, or an RTOS, on one or
>> more CPUs while allowing Linux to continue running on those remaining.
> And how is actually guaranteed that these two things are properly seperated
> (memory, devices, interrupts etc.) ?

Memory separation is primarily handled by the remoteproc subsystem, 
which will allocate and map memory as required by the firmware, though 
because the CPU is executing in kernel mode there is nothing preventing 
it accessing anything in the system. But that is of course the same as 
any root process which could do the same thing via /dev/mem. One must be 
root to offline the CPU from Linux and load firmware to it, so there is 
no greater hazard to the system than that firmware running as a root 
process within userland.

Separation of devices and interrupts is a system design issue, as this 
feature will find use in embedded systems where the system will be 
partitioned into Linux and bare metal components. This is done where 
there are requirements such as needing to run real time code as well as 
Linux, or enforce separation through firmware binaries running 
separately to Linux.
This would be useful, for example, for a modem driver running as bare 
metal code within one of the system VPEs and providing a virtio-net 
interface to the kernel. There would be no kernel driver present for 
such a device, therefore there would be no resource conflicts.

There only different thing about the MIPS implementation of remoteproc 
is that it turns one of the general purpose Linux CPUs into a remote 
processor, rather than there being a separate remote CPU within the SoC, 
as is the case with most remoteproc drivers. But unless there is some 
form of MMU between that CPU and the system bus, then it will have the 
same ability to access all system resources as is the case with this 
driver. Again I don't think there is any greater risk to the system here 
as there would be with any other remoteproc based system.

>
> We have rejected attempts to do exactly the same thing on x86 in the
> past. There is virtualization and NOHZ_FULL to do it proper and not just
> with a horrible hackery.

There is already a mechanism to do this in the upstream MIPS kernel - 
the VPE loader, which has been there 2005 (commit 
e01402b115cccb6357f956649487aca2c6f7fbba). One user of the VPE loader 
was Lantiq, who used it to load a proprietary modem driver, for which 
there is no GPL driver.
What we are proposing here is to move from that MIPS specific mechanism 
of running bare metal code to the standardized remoteproc subsystem such 
that people wanting to design a MIPS based system with both real time 
firmware and general Linux processing tasks may do so using standardized 
kernel interfaces.

Thanks,
Matt

>
> Thanks,
>
> 	tglx
>
>