linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] arm64: cpufeature: Allow early detect of specific features

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: <2fa17395-d268-5ec9-6033-08ecb7eba44a@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:45:03 +0000
From:   Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To:     Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     mark.rutland@....com, marc.zyngier@....com, james.morse@....com,
        daniel.thompson@...aro.org,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] arm64: cpufeature: Allow early detect of specific
 features

On 22/01/18 12:21, Julien Thierry wrote:
> 
> 
> On 22/01/18 12:05, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 17/01/18 11:54, Julien Thierry wrote:
>>> From: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
>>>
>>> Currently it is not possible to detect features of the boot CPU
>>> until the other CPUs have been brought up.
>>>
>>> This prevents us from reacting to features of the boot CPU until
>>> fairly late in the boot process. To solve this we allow a subset
>>> of features (that are likely to be common to all clusters) to be
>>> detected based on the boot CPU alone.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
>>> [julien.thierry@....com: check non-boot cpu missing early features, avoid
>>>              duplicates between early features and normal
>>>              features]
>>> Signed-off-by: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>
>>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
>>> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
>>> Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>>>   1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> index a73a592..6698404 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> @@ -52,6 +52,8 @@
>>>   DECLARE_BITMAP(cpu_hwcaps, ARM64_NCAPS);
>>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_hwcaps);
>>>
>>> +static void __init setup_early_feature_capabilities(void);
>>> +
>>>   /*
>>>    * Flag to indicate if we have computed the system wide
>>>    * capabilities based on the boot time active CPUs. This
>>> @@ -542,6 +544,8 @@ void __init init_cpu_features(struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info)
>>>           init_cpu_ftr_reg(SYS_ZCR_EL1, info->reg_zcr);
>>>           sve_init_vq_map();
>>>       }
>>> +
>>> +    setup_early_feature_capabilities();
>>>   }
>>>
>>>   static void update_cpu_ftr_reg(struct arm64_ftr_reg *reg, u64 new)
>>> @@ -846,7 +850,7 @@ static bool has_no_fpsimd(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int __unus
>>>                       ID_AA64PFR0_FP_SHIFT) < 0;
>>>   }
>>>
>>> -static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities arm64_features[] = {
>>> +static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities arm64_early_features[] = {
>>>       {
>>>           .desc = "GIC system register CPU interface",
>>>           .capability = ARM64_HAS_SYSREG_GIC_CPUIF,
>>> @@ -857,6 +861,10 @@ static bool has_no_fpsimd(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int __unus
>>>           .sign = FTR_UNSIGNED,
>>>           .min_field_value = 1,
>>>       },
>>> +    {}
>>> +};
>>> +
>>
>>
>> Julien,
>>
>> One potential problem with this is that we don't have a way
>> to make this work on a "theoretical" system with and without
>> GIC system reg interface. i.e, if we don't have the CONFIG
>> enabled for using ICC system regs for IRQ flags, the kernel
>> could still panic. I understand this is not a "normal" configuration
>> but, may be we could make the panic option based on whether
>> we actually use the system regs early enough ?
>>
> 
> I see, however I'm not sure what happens in the GIC drivers if we have a CPU running with a GICv3 and other CPUs with something else... But of course this is not technically limited by the arm64 capabilities handling.
> 
> What behaviour would you be looking for? A way to prevent the CPU to be brought up instead of panicking?
> 

If we have the CONFIG enabled for using system regs, we can continue
to panic the system. Otherwise, we should ignore the mismatch early,
as we don't use the system register access unless all boot time active
CPUs have it.

In a nutshell, this is an early feature only if the CONFIG is enabled,
otherwise should fall back to the normal behavior.

Cheers
Suzuki