Hi Will,
On 03/05/2018 09:56 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Shanker,
>
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 03:50:18PM -0600, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
>> The function SMCCC_ARCH_WORKAROUND_1 was introduced as part of SMC
>> V1.1 Calling Convention to mitigate CVE-2017-5715. This patch uses
>> the standard call SMCCC_ARCH_WORKAROUND_1 for Falkor chips instead
>> of Silicon provider service ID 0xC2001700.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shanker Donthineni <shank...@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h | 2 +-
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h | 2 --
>> arch/arm64/kernel/bpi.S | 8 ------
>> arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c | 55
>> ++++++++++++++--------------------------
>> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S | 12 ---------
>> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c | 10 --------
>> 6 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
>
> I'm happy to take this via arm64 if I get an ack from Marc/Christoffer.
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
>> index bb26382..6ecc249 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
>> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@
>> #define ARM64_SVE 22
>> #define ARM64_UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0 23
>> #define ARM64_HARDEN_BRANCH_PREDICTOR 24
>> -#define ARM64_HARDEN_BP_POST_GUEST_EXIT 25
>> +/* #define ARM64_UNALLOCATED_ENTRY 25 */
>> #define ARM64_HAS_RAS_EXTN 26
>>
>> #define ARM64_NCAPS 27
>
> These aren't ABI, so I think you can just drop
> ARM64_HARDEN_BP_POST_GUEST_EXIT and repack the others accordingly.
>
Sure, I'll remove it completely in v2 patch.
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
>> index 24961b7..ab4d0a9 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
>> @@ -68,8 +68,6 @@
>>
>> extern u32 __init_stage2_translation(void);
>>
>> -extern void __qcom_hyp_sanitize_btac_predictors(void);
>> -
>> #endif
>>
>> #endif /* __ARM_KVM_ASM_H__ */
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/bpi.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/bpi.S
>> index e5de335..dc4eb15 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/bpi.S
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/bpi.S
>> @@ -55,14 +55,6 @@ ENTRY(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs_start)
>> .endr
>> ENTRY(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs_end)
>>
>> -ENTRY(__qcom_hyp_sanitize_link_stack_start)
>> - stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]!
>> - .rept 16
>> - bl . + 4
>> - .endr
>> - ldp x29, x30, [sp], #16
>> -ENTRY(__qcom_hyp_sanitize_link_stack_end)
>> -
>> .macro smccc_workaround_1 inst
>> sub sp, sp, #(8 * 4)
>> stp x2, x3, [sp, #(8 * 0)]
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
>> index 52f15cd..d779ffd4 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
>> @@ -67,8 +67,6 @@ static int cpu_enable_trap_ctr_access(void *__unused)
>> DEFINE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(struct bp_hardening_data, bp_hardening_data);
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_KVM
>> -extern char __qcom_hyp_sanitize_link_stack_start[];
>> -extern char __qcom_hyp_sanitize_link_stack_end[];
>> extern char __smccc_workaround_1_smc_start[];
>> extern char __smccc_workaround_1_smc_end[];
>> extern char __smccc_workaround_1_hvc_start[];
>> @@ -115,8 +113,6 @@ static void __install_bp_hardening_cb(bp_hardening_cb_t
>> fn,
>> spin_unlock(&bp_lock);
>> }
>> #else
>> -#define __qcom_hyp_sanitize_link_stack_start NULL
>> -#define __qcom_hyp_sanitize_link_stack_end NULL
>> #define __smccc_workaround_1_smc_start NULL
>> #define __smccc_workaround_1_smc_end NULL
>> #define __smccc_workaround_1_hvc_start NULL
>> @@ -161,12 +157,25 @@ static void call_hvc_arch_workaround_1(void)
>> arm_smccc_1_1_hvc(ARM_SMCCC_ARCH_WORKAROUND_1, NULL);
>> }
>>
>> +static void qcom_link_stack_sanitization(void)
>> +{
>> + u64 tmp;
>> +
>> + asm volatile("mov %0, x30 \n"
>> + ".rept 16 \n"
>> + "bl . + 4 \n"
>> + ".endr \n"
>> + "mov x30, %0 \n"
>> + : "=&r" (tmp));
>> +}
>> +
>> static int enable_smccc_arch_workaround_1(void *data)
>> {
>> const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry = data;
>> bp_hardening_cb_t cb;
>> void *smccc_start, *smccc_end;
>> struct arm_smccc_res res;
>> + u32 midr = read_cpuid_id();
>>
>> if (!entry->matches(entry, SCOPE_LOCAL_CPU))
>> return 0;
>> @@ -199,33 +208,15 @@ static int enable_smccc_arch_workaround_1(void *data)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> + if (((midr & MIDR_CPU_MODEL_MASK) == MIDR_QCOM_FALKOR) ||
>> + ((midr & MIDR_CPU_MODEL_MASK) == MIDR_QCOM_FALKOR_V1))
>> + cb = qcom_link_stack_sanitization;
>
> Is this just a performance thing? Do you actually see an advantage over
> always making the firmware call? We've seen minimal impact in our testing.
>
Yes, we've couple of advantages using the standard SMCCC_ARCH_WOKAROUND_1
framework.
- Improves the code readability.
- Avoid the unnecessary MIDR checks on each vCPU exit.
- Validates ID_AA64PFR0_CVS2 feature for Falkor chips.
- Avoids the 2nd link stack sanitization workaround in firmware.
> Will
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
--
Shanker Donthineni
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux
Foundation Collaborative Project.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
