linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: Set SSBS for user threads while creation

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: <3a50c921-b37b-ea3d-1b9e-87113d3d3fd3@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 24 Dec 2019 14:00:05 +0530
From:   Srinivas Ramana <sramana@...eaurora.org>
To:     Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>, will@...nel.org,
        catalin.marinas@....com, maz@...nel.org, will.deacon@....com
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Set SSBS for user threads while creation

On 12/24/2019 12:36 PM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/23/2019 06:32 PM, Srinivas Ramana wrote:
>> Current SSBS implementation takes care of setting the
>> SSBS bit in start_thread() for user threads. While this works
>> for tasks launched with fork/clone followed by execve, for cases
>> where userspace would just call fork (eg, Java applications) this
>> leaves the SSBS bit unset. This results in performance
>> regression for such tasks.
>>
>> It is understood that commit cbdf8a189a66 ("arm64: Force SSBS
>> on context switch") masks this issue, but that was done for a
>> different reason where heterogeneous CPUs(both SSBS supported
>> and unsupported) are present. It is appropriate to take care
>> of the SSBS bit for all threads while creation itself.
> 
> So this fixes the situation (i.e low performance) from the creation time
> of a task with fork() which will never see a subsequent execve, till it
> gets context switched for the very first time ?
> 
Yes, that is correct.

>>
>> Fixes: 8f04e8e6e29c ("arm64: ssbd: Add support for PSTATE.SSBS rather than trapping to EL3")
>> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Ramana <sramana@...eaurora.org>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 7 +++++++
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> index 71f788cd2b18..a8f05cc39261 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> @@ -399,6 +399,13 @@ int copy_thread(unsigned long clone_flags, unsigned long stack_start,
>>   		 */
>>   		if (clone_flags & CLONE_SETTLS)
>>   			p->thread.uw.tp_value = childregs->regs[3];
>> +
>> +		if (arm64_get_ssbd_state() != ARM64_SSBD_FORCE_ENABLE) {
>> +			if (is_compat_thread(task_thread_info(p)))
>> +				set_compat_ssbs_bit(childregs);
>> +			else
>> +				set_ssbs_bit(childregs);
>> +		}
>>   	} else {
>>   		memset(childregs, 0, sizeof(struct pt_regs));
>>   		childregs->pstate = PSR_MODE_EL1h;
>>

Thanks,
-- Srinivas R

-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation
Center, Inc., is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation
Collaborative Project