linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: Add overrride for MPAM

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: <46ed31b37b4b92720b26be66f3e6366a714024cf.camel@xry111.site>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2025 19:47:03 +0800
From: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>, James Morse
	 <james.morse@....com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
 Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>, Mingcong Bai
 <jeffbai@...c.io>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Add overrride for MPAM

On Tue, 2025-04-01 at 14:04 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 4/1/25 11:26, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > As the message of the commit 09e6b306f3ba ("arm64: cpufeature: discover
> > CPU support for MPAM") already states, if a buggy firmware fails to
> > either enable MPAM or emulate the trap as if it were disabled, the
> > kernel will just fail to boot.  While upgrading the firmware should be
> > the best solution, we have some hardware of which the vender have made
> > no response 2 months after we requested a firmware update.  Allow
> > overriding it so our devices don't become some e-waste.
> 
> There could be similar problems, where firmware might not enable arch
> features as required. Just wondering if there is a platform policy in
> place for enabling id-reg overrides for working around such scenarios
> to prevent a kernel crash etc ?

In https://lore.kernel.org/all/87jzcfsuep.wl-maz@kernel.org/:

   > For such cases, when MPAM is incorrectly advertised, can we have kernel
   > command line parameter like mpam=0 to override it's detection?
   
   We could, but only when we can confirm what the problem is.

And there was prior arts like:

commit 892f7237b3ffb090f1b1f1e55fe7c50664405aed
Author: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Date:   Wed Jul 20 11:52:19 2022 +0100

    arm64: Delay initialisation of cpuinfo_arm64::reg_{zcr,smcr}
    
    Even if we are now able to tell the kernel to avoid exposing SVE/SME
    from the command line, we still have a couple of places where we
    unconditionally access the ZCR_EL1 (resp. SMCR_EL1) registers.
    
    On systems with broken firmwares, this results in a crash even if
    arm64.nosve (resp. arm64.nosme) was passed on the command-line.
    
    To avoid this, only update cpuinfo_arm64::reg_{zcr,smcr} once
    we have computed the sanitised version for the corresponding
    feature registers (ID_AA64PFR0 for SVE, and ID_AA64PFR1 for
    SME). This results in some minor refactoring.

-- 
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University