linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] arm64: mte: Enable async tag check fault

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: <20210119143412.GD17369@gaia>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jan 2021 14:34:13 +0000
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
        Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
        Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@....com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] arm64: mte: Enable async tag check fault

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 06:30:32PM +0000, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
>  static void update_sctlr_el1_tcf0(u64 tcf0)
>  {
>  	/* ISB required for the kernel uaccess routines */
> @@ -235,6 +273,15 @@ void mte_thread_switch(struct task_struct *next)
>  	/* avoid expensive SCTLR_EL1 accesses if no change */
>  	if (current->thread.sctlr_tcf0 != next->thread.sctlr_tcf0)
>  		update_sctlr_el1_tcf0(next->thread.sctlr_tcf0);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Check if an async tag exception occurred at EL1.
> +	 *
> +	 * Note: On the context switch path we rely on the dsb() present
> +	 * in __switch_to() to guarantee that the indirect writes to TFSR_EL1
> +	 * are synchronized before this point.
> +	 */
> +	mte_check_tfsr_el1();
>  }

We need an isb() before mte_check_tfsr_el1() here as well, we only have
a dsb() in __switch_to(). We do have an isb() in update_sctlr_el1_tcf0()
but only if the check passed. Now, it's worth benchmarking how expensive
update_sctlr_el1_tcf0() is (i.e. an SCTLR_EL1 access + isb with
something like hackbench) and we could probably remove the check
altogether. In the meantime, you can add an isb() on the "else" path of
the above check.

-- 
Catalin