From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
Cc: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Reject attempts to set invalid debug arch version
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 10:23:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86jzvqbmr7.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230623205232.2837077-1-oliver.upton@linux.dev>
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 21:52:32 +0100,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> The debug architecture is mandatory in ARMv8, so KVM should not allow
> userspace to configure a vCPU with less than that. Of course, this isn't
> handled elegantly by the generic ID register plumbing, as the respective
> ID register fields have a nonzero starting value.
>
> Add an explicit check for debug versions less than v8 of the
> architecture.
>
> Fixes: c118cead07a7 ("KVM: arm64: Use generic sanitisation for ID_(AA64)DFR0_EL1")
> Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index 1a13bab1a06c..5b25053a8e04 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -1482,6 +1482,7 @@ static int set_id_aa64dfr0_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> const struct sys_reg_desc *rd,
> u64 val)
> {
> + u8 debugver = SYS_FIELD_GET(ID_AA64DFR0_EL1, DebugVer, val);
> u8 pmuver = SYS_FIELD_GET(ID_AA64DFR0_EL1, PMUVer, val);
>
> /*
> @@ -1501,6 +1502,13 @@ static int set_id_aa64dfr0_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> if (pmuver == ID_AA64DFR0_EL1_PMUVer_IMP_DEF)
> val &= ~ID_AA64DFR0_EL1_PMUVer_MASK;
>
> + /*
> + * ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.DebugVer is one of those awkward fields with a
> + * nonzero minimum safe value.
> + */
> + if (debugver < ID_AA64DFR0_EL1_DebugVer_IMP)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
Why isn't that caught by the check at the end of arm64_check_features
which says that for RO fields, the only safe value is the sanitised
version?
Am I missing something obvious (full disclosure, I've had a single
coffee at this time of the day...)?
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-26 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-23 20:52 [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Reject attempts to set invalid debug arch version Oliver Upton
2023-06-26 9:23 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2023-06-26 16:25 ` Oliver Upton
2023-06-29 1:12 ` Jitindar Singh, Suraj
2023-06-29 2:58 ` Oliver Upton
2023-06-29 20:52 ` Jitindar Singh, Suraj
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=86jzvqbmr7.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jingzhangos@google.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=reijiw@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.