linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: cpufeature: Enable Qualcomm Falkor errata 1009 for Kryo

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: <20191029115008.GD12103@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Tue, 29 Oct 2019 11:50:08 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: cpufeature: Enable Qualcomm Falkor errata 1009
 for Kryo

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 11:06:04PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> The Kryo cores share errata 1009 with Falkor, so add their model
> definitions and enable it for them as well.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h | 4 ++++
>  arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c   | 2 ++
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h
> index b1454d117cd2..8067476ea2e4 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h
> @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@
>  #define QCOM_CPU_PART_FALKOR_V1		0x800
>  #define QCOM_CPU_PART_FALKOR		0xC00
>  #define QCOM_CPU_PART_KRYO		0x200
> +#define QCOM_CPU_PART_KRYO_GOLD		0x211
> +#define QCOM_CPU_PART_KRYO_SILVER	0x205

Can you double-check this, please? My Pixel-1 phone claims something with
0x201, but I don't know if that's what you were aiming for. It would be
great if Qualcomm could document these register fields somewhere, especially
since we're trying to work around their hardware errata for them.

That said...

>  #define NVIDIA_CPU_PART_DENVER		0x003
>  #define NVIDIA_CPU_PART_CARMEL		0x004
> @@ -109,6 +111,8 @@
>  #define MIDR_QCOM_FALKOR_V1 MIDR_CPU_MODEL(ARM_CPU_IMP_QCOM, QCOM_CPU_PART_FALKOR_V1)
>  #define MIDR_QCOM_FALKOR MIDR_CPU_MODEL(ARM_CPU_IMP_QCOM, QCOM_CPU_PART_FALKOR)
>  #define MIDR_QCOM_KRYO MIDR_CPU_MODEL(ARM_CPU_IMP_QCOM, QCOM_CPU_PART_KRYO)
> +#define MIDR_QCOM_KRYO_GOLD MIDR_CPU_MODEL(ARM_CPU_IMP_QCOM, QCOM_CPU_PART_KRYO_GOLD)
> +#define MIDR_QCOM_KRYO_SILVER MIDR_CPU_MODEL(ARM_CPU_IMP_QCOM, QCOM_CPU_PART_KRYO_SILVER)
>  #define MIDR_NVIDIA_DENVER MIDR_CPU_MODEL(ARM_CPU_IMP_NVIDIA, NVIDIA_CPU_PART_DENVER)
>  #define MIDR_NVIDIA_CARMEL MIDR_CPU_MODEL(ARM_CPU_IMP_NVIDIA, NVIDIA_CPU_PART_CARMEL)
>  #define MIDR_FUJITSU_A64FX MIDR_CPU_MODEL(ARM_CPU_IMP_FUJITSU, FUJITSU_CPU_PART_A64FX)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> index cdd8df033536..315780e7bee7 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> @@ -627,6 +627,8 @@ static const struct midr_range arm64_harden_el2_vectors[] = {
>  static const struct midr_range arm64_repeat_tlbi_cpus[] = {
>  #ifdef CONFIG_QCOM_FALKOR_ERRATUM_1009
>  	MIDR_RANGE(MIDR_QCOM_FALKOR_V1, 0, 0, 0, 0),
> +	MIDR_ALL_VERSIONS(MIDR_QCOM_KRYO_GOLD),
> +	MIDR_ALL_VERSIONS(MIDR_QCOM_KRYO_SILVER),

... why aren't you following what we do for E1003 and using the
'is_kryo_midr' callback to match these CPUs?

Will