linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] riscv: force __cpu_up_ variables to put in data section

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: <CANXhq0qk_GQubgWB9=2uMVDSLSCWaiLtPkBcHQCPLCHyVrtdnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 2 May 2020 14:00:30 +0800
From:   Zong Li <zong.li@...ive.com>
To:     Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>
Cc:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: force __cpu_up_ variables to put in data section

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 2:23 AM Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 2:53 AM Zong Li <zong.li@...ive.com> wrote:
> >
> > Put __cpu_up_stack_pointer and __cpu_up_task_pointer in data section.
> > Currently, these two variables are put in bss section, there is a
> > potential risk that secondary harts get the uninitialized value before
> > main hart finishing the bss clearing. In this case, all secondary
> > harts would go through the waiting loop and enable the MMU before
> > main hart set up the page table.
> >
>
> That would be only true if you are using random booting protocol with
> SBI v0.1 implementation.
> With HSM extension in place, all the secondary cores are waiting in
> firmware. The booting core
> will bring them up one by one from cpu_up method.
>
> The HSM extension is already available in OpenSBI v0.7 and Linux
> kernel 5.7-rc1 onwards.

If I understand correctly, the newest kernel still works with earlier
OpenSBI than v0.7 or BBL. It seems to me that we need to consider the
use cases if we don't limit it to up to OpenSBI v0.7.

>
> > Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@...ive.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/cpu_ops.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu_ops.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> > index c4c33bf02369..0ec22354018c 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> > @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@
> >
> >  const struct cpu_operations *cpu_ops[NR_CPUS] __ro_after_init;
> >
> > -void *__cpu_up_stack_pointer[NR_CPUS];
> > -void *__cpu_up_task_pointer[NR_CPUS];
> > +void *__cpu_up_stack_pointer[NR_CPUS] __section(.data);
> > +void *__cpu_up_task_pointer[NR_CPUS] __section(.data);
> >
> >  extern const struct cpu_operations cpu_ops_sbi;
> >  extern const struct cpu_operations cpu_ops_spinwait;
> > --
> > 2.26.1
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Atish