linux-kernel - [PATCH RFC v3 14/21] irqchip/gic-v3: Don't return errors from gic_acpi_match

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: <E1rDOgx-00Dvkv-Bb@rmk-PC.armlinux.org.uk>
Date:   Wed, 13 Dec 2023 12:50:23 +0000
From:   Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
To:     linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
        x86@...nel.org, acpica-devel@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-csky@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        jianyong.wu@....com, justin.he@....com,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC v3 14/21] irqchip/gic-v3: Don't return errors from
 gic_acpi_match_gicc()

From: James Morse <james.morse@....com>

gic_acpi_match_gicc() is only called via gic_acpi_count_gicr_regions().
It should only count the number of enabled redistributors, but it
also tries to sanity check the GICC entry, currently returning an
error if the Enabled bit is set, but the gicr_base_address is zero.

Adding support for the online-capable bit to the sanity check
complicates it, for no benefit. The existing check implicitly
depends on gic_acpi_count_gicr_regions() previous failing to find
any GICR regions (as it is valid to have gicr_base_address of zero if
the redistributors are described via a GICR entry).

Instead of complicating the check, remove it. Failures that happen
at this point cause the irqchip not to register, meaning no irqs
can be requested. The kernel grinds to a panic() pretty quickly.

Without the check, MADT tables that exhibit this problem are still
caught by gic_populate_rdist(), which helpfully also prints what
went wrong:
| CPU4: mpidr 100 has no re-distributor!

Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
Tested-by: Miguel Luis <miguel.luis@...cle.com>
Tested-by: Vishnu Pajjuri <vishnu@...amperecomputing.com>
Tested-by: Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@....com>
Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
---
 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 18 ++++++------------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
index 98b0329b7154..ebecd4546830 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
@@ -2420,21 +2420,15 @@ static int __init gic_acpi_match_gicc(union acpi_subtable_headers *header,
 
 	/*
 	 * If GICC is enabled and has valid gicr base address, then it means
-	 * GICR base is presented via GICC
+	 * GICR base is presented via GICC. The redistributor is only known to
+	 * be accessible if the GICC is marked as enabled. If this bit is not
+	 * set, we'd need to add the redistributor at runtime, which isn't
+	 * supported.
 	 */
-	if (acpi_gicc_is_usable(gicc) && gicc->gicr_base_address) {
+	if (gicc->flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED && gicc->gicr_base_address)
 		acpi_data.enabled_rdists++;
-		return 0;
-	}
 
-	/*
-	 * It's perfectly valid firmware can pass disabled GICC entry, driver
-	 * should not treat as errors, skip the entry instead of probe fail.
-	 */
-	if (!acpi_gicc_is_usable(gicc))
-		return 0;
-
-	return -ENODEV;
+	return 0;
 }
 
 static int __init gic_acpi_count_gicr_regions(void)
-- 
2.30.2