linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 7/7] KVM: arm64: Normalize cache configuration

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: <0ac18497-8392-8ea3-05ee-7f2377a4374c@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Jan 2023 02:36:39 +0900
From:   Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...il.com>
To:     Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc:     Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        asahi@...ts.linux.dev, Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@...enzweig.io>,
        Sven Peter <sven@...npeter.dev>,
        Hector Martin <marcan@...can.st>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 7/7] KVM: arm64: Normalize cache configuration

On 2023/01/22 3:15, Oliver Upton wrote:
> Hey Marc,
> 
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 12:02:03PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jan 2023 19:46:16 +0000, Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev> wrote:
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>>> index 459e6d358dab..b6228f7d1d8d 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>>> @@ -148,17 +148,19 @@ static u32 get_ccsidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 csselr)
>>>   
>>>   static int set_ccsidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 csselr, u32 val)
>>>   {
>>> -	u8 line_size = FIELD_GET(CCSIDR_EL1_LineSize, val);
>>> +	u8 line_size = SYS_FIELD_GET(CCSIDR_EL1, LineSize, val);
>>> +	u32 cur = get_ccsidr(vcpu, csselr);
>>> +	u8 min_line_size = SYS_FIELD_GET(CCSIDR_EL1, LineSize, cur);
>>>   	u32 *ccsidr = vcpu->arch.ccsidr;
>>>   	u32 i;
>>>   
>>> -	if ((val & CCSIDR_EL1_RES0) || line_size < get_min_cache_line_size(csselr))
>>> +	if (cur == val)
>>> +		return 0;
>>> +
>>> +	if ((val & CCSIDR_EL1_RES0) || line_size < min_line_size)
>>>   		return -EINVAL;
>>
>> This doesn't look right. You're comparing the value userspace is
>> trying to set for a given level with the value that is already set for
>> that level, and forbid the cache line size to be smaller. It works if
>> no value has been set yet (you fallback to something derived from
>> CTR_EL0), but this fails if userspace does multiple writes.
> 
> Good catch, I tried to skip over the unit/field conversions by doing this
> but it has the consequence of not working as expected for multiple writes.
> 
>> The original check is against CTR_EL0, which makes absolute sense
>> because we want to check across the whole hierarchy. It is just that
>> the original code has two bugs:
>>
>> - It fails to convert the CCSIDR_EL1.LineSize value to a number of
>>    words (the missing +4). Admire how the architecture is actively
>>    designed to be hostile to SW by providing two different formats for
>>    the cache line size, none of which is in... bytes.
>>
>> - It passes the full CSSELR value to get_min_cache_line_size(), while
>>    this function wants a bool... Yes, there are times where you'd want
>>    a stronger type system (did anyone say Rust? ;-)
> 
> Hey now, if you say it enough times people are going to start getting
> ideas ;-P
> 
>> I propose that we fold something like the patch below in instead
>> (tested with get-reg-list).
> 
> Agreed, I've backed out my diff and applied yours. Pushed (with force!)
> to my repo now, PTAL.
> 
> --
> Thanks,
> Oliver
> 

I was so careless that I missed two bugs and failed to test the last 
version of my patch. It is fortunate that the bugs were caught by 
careful review though we don't have a strong type system (yet). Your 
tree looks good to me.

Regards,
Akihiko Odaki