linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 09/21] arm64: cpufeature: Add global feature override facility

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: <de9d8631-4ff9-9d0c-e4eb-5ce0eeb0ecea@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jan 2021 12:38:43 -0800
From:   Srinivas Ramana <sramana@...eaurora.org>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        David Brazdil <dbrazdil@...gle.com>,
        Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@...gle.com>,
        Ajay Patil <pajay@....qualcomm.com>,
        Prasad Sodagudi <psodagud@...eaurora.org>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/21] arm64: cpufeature: Add global feature override
 facility

Hi Catalin,

On 1/11/2021 10:41 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:27:59PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Add a facility to globally override a feature, no matter what
>> the HW says. Yes, this is dangerous.
> Yeah, it's dangerous. We can make it less so if we only allow safe
> values (e.g. lower if FTR_UNSIGNED).
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>> index 9a555809b89c..465d2cb63bfc 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>> @@ -75,6 +75,8 @@ struct arm64_ftr_reg {
>>   	u64				sys_val;
>>   	u64				user_val;
>>   	const struct arm64_ftr_bits	*ftr_bits;
>> +	u64				*override_val;
>> +	u64				*override_mask;
>>   };
> At the arm64_ftr_reg level, we don't have any information about the safe
> values for a feature. Could we instead move this to arm64_ftr_bits? We
> probably only need a single field. When populating the feature values,
> we can make sure it doesn't go above the hardware one.
>
> I attempted a feature modification for MTE here, though I dropped the
> entire series in the meantime as we clarified the ARM ARM:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20200515171612.1020-24-catalin.marinas@arm.com/
>
> Srinivas copied it in his patch (but forgot to give credit ;)):

Sorry about that. I did mention that its taken from your patch-set in my 
cover letter. But missed your signed-off-by in the patch.

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/6dfdf691b5ed57df81c4c61422949af5@misterjones.org/T/#m1ae76e6096c07ab5f1636a4e383a3fd6cfb4665f

Since we can ignore my patch with the mechanism added by Marc, I am not 
re-sending this. Thanks.

>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/1610152163-16554-3-git-send-email-sramana@codeaurora.org/
>
> The above adds a filter function but, instead, just use your mechanism in
> this series for idreg.feature setting via cmdline. The arm64_ftr_value()
> function extracts the hardware value and lowers it if a cmdline argument
> was passed.
>