All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, Srinivas Ramana <sramana@codeaurora.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: ssbs: Fix context-switch when SSBS instructions are present
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 12:41:26 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b96ac2ae6b444a53be72a8656592ab01@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200206122047.GA18762@willie-the-truck>

On 2020-02-06 12:20, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 11:49:31AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 2020-02-06 11:34, Will Deacon wrote:
>> > When all CPUs in the system implement the SSBS instructions, we
>> > advertise this via an HWCAP and allow EL0 to toggle the SSBS field
>> > in PSTATE directly. Consequently, the state of the mitigation is not
>> > accurately tracked by the TIF_SSBD thread flag and the PSTATE value
>> > is authoritative.
>> >
>> > Avoid forcing the SSBS field in context-switch on such a system, and
>> > simply rely on the PSTATE register instead.
>> >
>> > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
>> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> > Cc: Srinivas Ramana <sramana@codeaurora.org>
>> > Fixes: cbdf8a189a66 ("arm64: Force SSBS on context switch")
>> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
>> > ---
>> >  arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 7 +++++++
>> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> > index d54586d5b031..45e867f40a7a 100644
>> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> > @@ -466,6 +466,13 @@ static void ssbs_thread_switch(struct task_struct
>> > *next)
>> >  	if (unlikely(next->flags & PF_KTHREAD))
>> >  		return;
>> >
>> > +	/*
>> > +	 * If all CPUs implement the SSBS instructions, then we just
>> > +	 * need to context-switch the PSTATE field.
>> > +	 */
>> > +	if (cpu_have_feature(cpu_feature(SSBS)))
>> > +		return;
>> > +
>> >  	/* If the mitigation is enabled, then we leave SSBS clear. */
>> >  	if ((arm64_get_ssbd_state() == ARM64_SSBD_FORCE_ENABLE) ||
>> >  	    test_tsk_thread_flag(next, TIF_SSBD))
>> 
>> Looks goot to me.
> 
> Ja!

Ach...

> 
>> Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> 
> Cheers. It occurs to me that, although the patch is correct, the 
> comment and
> the commit message need tweaking because we're actually predicating 
> this on
> the presence of SSBS in any form, so the instructions may not be
> implemented. That's fine because the prctl() updates pstate, so it 
> remains
> authoritative and can't be lost by one of the CPUs treating it as 
> RAZ/WI.

True. It is the PSTATE bit that actually matters, not the presence of 
the control
instruction.

> I'll spin a v2 later on.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
	kernel-team@android.com, stable@vger.kernel.org,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Srinivas Ramana <sramana@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: ssbs: Fix context-switch when SSBS instructions are present
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 12:41:26 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b96ac2ae6b444a53be72a8656592ab01@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200206122047.GA18762@willie-the-truck>

On 2020-02-06 12:20, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 11:49:31AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 2020-02-06 11:34, Will Deacon wrote:
>> > When all CPUs in the system implement the SSBS instructions, we
>> > advertise this via an HWCAP and allow EL0 to toggle the SSBS field
>> > in PSTATE directly. Consequently, the state of the mitigation is not
>> > accurately tracked by the TIF_SSBD thread flag and the PSTATE value
>> > is authoritative.
>> >
>> > Avoid forcing the SSBS field in context-switch on such a system, and
>> > simply rely on the PSTATE register instead.
>> >
>> > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
>> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> > Cc: Srinivas Ramana <sramana@codeaurora.org>
>> > Fixes: cbdf8a189a66 ("arm64: Force SSBS on context switch")
>> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
>> > ---
>> >  arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 7 +++++++
>> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> > index d54586d5b031..45e867f40a7a 100644
>> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
>> > @@ -466,6 +466,13 @@ static void ssbs_thread_switch(struct task_struct
>> > *next)
>> >  	if (unlikely(next->flags & PF_KTHREAD))
>> >  		return;
>> >
>> > +	/*
>> > +	 * If all CPUs implement the SSBS instructions, then we just
>> > +	 * need to context-switch the PSTATE field.
>> > +	 */
>> > +	if (cpu_have_feature(cpu_feature(SSBS)))
>> > +		return;
>> > +
>> >  	/* If the mitigation is enabled, then we leave SSBS clear. */
>> >  	if ((arm64_get_ssbd_state() == ARM64_SSBD_FORCE_ENABLE) ||
>> >  	    test_tsk_thread_flag(next, TIF_SSBD))
>> 
>> Looks goot to me.
> 
> Ja!

Ach...

> 
>> Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> 
> Cheers. It occurs to me that, although the patch is correct, the 
> comment and
> the commit message need tweaking because we're actually predicating 
> this on
> the presence of SSBS in any form, so the instructions may not be
> implemented. That's fine because the prctl() updates pstate, so it 
> remains
> authoritative and can't be lost by one of the CPUs treating it as 
> RAZ/WI.

True. It is the PSTATE bit that actually matters, not the presence of 
the control
instruction.

> I'll spin a v2 later on.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

  reply	other threads:[~2020-02-06 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-06 11:34 [PATCH] arm64: ssbs: Fix context-switch when SSBS instructions are present Will Deacon
2020-02-06 11:34 ` Will Deacon
2020-02-06 11:49 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-06 11:49   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-06 12:20   ` Will Deacon
2020-02-06 12:20     ` Will Deacon
2020-02-06 12:41     ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2020-02-06 12:41       ` Marc Zyngier

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=b96ac2ae6b444a53be72a8656592ab01@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=sramana@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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.