| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <bba3e573-989f-432b-82c9-3f5872563e9f@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 14:24:39 +0100
From: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>, Zenghui Yu
<yuzenghui@...wei.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@....com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@....com>, Fuad Tabba <tabba@...gle.com>,
linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gankulkarni@...amperecomputing.com>,
Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>, Shanker Donthineni <sdonthineni@...dia.com>,
Alper Gun <alpergun@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/43] arm64: RME: Handle Granule Protection Faults
(GPFs)
On 24/10/2024 15:17, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> Steven Price <steven.price@....com> writes:
>
>> If the host attempts to access granules that have been delegated for use
>> in a realm these accesses will be caught and will trigger a Granule
>> Protection Fault (GPF).
>>
>> A fault during a page walk signals a bug in the kernel and is handled by
>> oopsing the kernel. A non-page walk fault could be caused by user space
>> having access to a page which has been delegated to the kernel and will
>> trigger a SIGBUS to allow debugging why user space is trying to access a
>> delegated page.
>>
>
> A non-page walk fault can also be caused by host kernel trying to access a
> page which it had delegated before. It would be nice to dump details
> like FAR in that case. Right now it shows only the below.
While I agree FAR would be handy, this isn't specific to a GPF.
arm64_notify_die() takes the FAR, but in the case of a kernel fault
ignores it and calls die(). I'm not sure if there's a good reason for it
not calling die_kernel_fault() instead which would print the FAR. Or
indeed whether the FAR should be passed instead of the ESR (although
changing that now would probably be confusing).
This affects e.g. do_sea(), do_mem_abort() and others too. It might be
worth sending a patch to improve that behaviour, but I think the
handling for GPFs of using arm64_notify_die() is correct.
Thanks,
Steve
> [ 285.122310] Internal error: Granule Protection Fault not on table walk: 0000000096000068 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> [ 285.122427] Modules linked in:
> [ 285.122512] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 217 Comm: kvm-vcpu-0 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc1-00082-g8461d8333829 #42
> [ 285.122656] Hardware name: FVP Base RevC (DT)
> [ 285.122733] pstate: 81400009 (Nzcv daif +PAN -UAO -TCO +DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
> [ 285.122871] pc : clear_page+0x18/0x50
> [ 285.122975] lr : kvm_gmem_get_pfn+0xbc/0x190
> [ 285.123110] sp : ffff800082cef900
> [ 285.123182] x29: ffff800082cef910 x28: 0000000090000000 x27: 0000000090000006
> .....
>
> -aneesh
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
>> ---
>> Changes since v2:
>> * Include missing "Granule Protection Fault at level -1"
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/mm/fault.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> index 8b281cf308b3..f9d72a936d48 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> @@ -804,6 +804,25 @@ static int do_tag_check_fault(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static int do_gpf_ptw(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
>> +{
>> + const struct fault_info *inf = esr_to_fault_info(esr);
>> +
>> + die_kernel_fault(inf->name, far, esr, regs);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int do_gpf(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
>> +{
>> + const struct fault_info *inf = esr_to_fault_info(esr);
>> +
>> + if (!is_el1_instruction_abort(esr) && fixup_exception(regs))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + arm64_notify_die(inf->name, regs, inf->sig, inf->code, far, esr);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static const struct fault_info fault_info[] = {
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "ttbr address size fault" },
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "level 1 address size fault" },
>> @@ -840,12 +859,12 @@ static const struct fault_info fault_info[] = {
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 32" },
>> { do_alignment_fault, SIGBUS, BUS_ADRALN, "alignment fault" },
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 34" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 35" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 36" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 37" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 38" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 39" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 40" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "Granule Protection Fault at level -1" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "Granule Protection Fault at level 0" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "Granule Protection Fault at level 1" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "Granule Protection Fault at level 2" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "Granule Protection Fault at level 3" },
>> + { do_gpf, SIGBUS, SI_KERNEL, "Granule Protection Fault not on table walk" },
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "level -1 address size fault" },
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 42" },
>> { do_translation_fault, SIGSEGV, SEGV_MAPERR, "level -1 translation fault" },
>> --
>> 2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists