linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] arm64: Allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 support
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 21:51:14 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201027215118.27003-3-will@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201027215118.27003-1-will@kernel.org>

When confronted with a mixture of CPUs, some of which support 32-bit
applications and others which don't, we quite sensibly treat the system
as 64-bit only for userspace and prevent execve() of 32-bit binaries.

Unfortunately, some crazy folks have decided to build systems like this
with the intention of running 32-bit applications, so relax our
sanitisation logic to continue to advertise 32-bit support to userspace
on these systems and track the real 32-bit capable cores in a cpumask
instead. For now, the default behaviour remains but will be tied to
a command-line option in a later patch.

Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h |  3 ++
 arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c      | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
index f7e7144af174..aeab42cb917e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
@@ -582,6 +582,9 @@ static inline bool cpu_supports_mixed_endian_el0(void)
 	return id_aa64mmfr0_mixed_endian_el0(read_cpuid(ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1));
 }
 
+const struct cpumask *system_32bit_el0_cpumask(void);
+bool system_has_mismatched_32bit_el0(void);
+
 static inline bool system_supports_32bit_el0(void)
 {
 	return cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_32BIT_EL0);
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
index dcc165b3fc04..2e2219cbd54c 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -104,6 +104,10 @@ DECLARE_BITMAP(boot_capabilities, ARM64_NPATCHABLE);
 bool arm64_use_ng_mappings = false;
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(arm64_use_ng_mappings);
 
+static bool __read_mostly __allow_mismatched_32bit_el0;
+/* Mask of CPUs supporting 32-bit EL0. Only valid if we allow a mismatch */
+static cpumask_var_t cpu_32bit_el0_mask __cpumask_var_read_mostly;
+
 /*
  * Flag to indicate if we have computed the system wide
  * capabilities based on the boot time active CPUs. This
@@ -942,8 +946,11 @@ static int update_32bit_cpu_features(int cpu, struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info,
 	 * as the register values may be UNKNOWN and we're not going to be
 	 * using them for anything.
 	 */
-	if (!id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(pfr0))
-		return taint;
+	if (!id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(info->reg_id_aa64pfr0))
+		return 0;
+
+	if (__allow_mismatched_32bit_el0)
+		cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpu_32bit_el0_mask);
 
 	/*
 	 * If we don't have AArch32 at EL1, then relax the strictness of
@@ -1193,6 +1200,47 @@ has_cpuid_feature(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int scope)
 	return feature_matches(val, entry);
 }
 
+static int __init init_32bit_el0_mask(void)
+{
+	if (!__allow_mismatched_32bit_el0)
+		return 0;
+
+	if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpu_32bit_el0_mask, GFP_KERNEL))
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	if (id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(per_cpu(cpu_data, 0).reg_id_aa64pfr0))
+		cpumask_set_cpu(0, cpu_32bit_el0_mask);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+early_initcall(init_32bit_el0_mask);
+
+const struct cpumask *system_32bit_el0_cpumask(void)
+{
+	if (__allow_mismatched_32bit_el0)
+		return cpu_32bit_el0_mask;
+
+	return system_supports_32bit_el0() ? cpu_present_mask : cpu_none_mask;
+}
+
+bool system_has_mismatched_32bit_el0(void)
+{
+	u64 reg;
+	unsigned int fld;
+
+	if (!__allow_mismatched_32bit_el0)
+		return false;
+
+	reg = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1);
+	fld = cpuid_feature_extract_unsigned_field(reg, ID_AA64PFR0_EL0_SHIFT);
+	return fld == ID_AA64PFR0_EL0_64BIT_ONLY;
+}
+
+static bool has_32bit_el0(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int scope)
+{
+	return has_cpuid_feature(entry, scope) || __allow_mismatched_32bit_el0;
+}
+
 static bool has_useable_gicv3_cpuif(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int scope)
 {
 	bool has_sre;
@@ -1803,7 +1851,7 @@ static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities arm64_features[] = {
 		.desc = "32-bit EL0 Support",
 		.capability = ARM64_HAS_32BIT_EL0,
 		.type = ARM64_CPUCAP_SYSTEM_FEATURE,
-		.matches = has_cpuid_feature,
+		.matches = has_32bit_el0,
 		.sys_reg = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1,
 		.sign = FTR_UNSIGNED,
 		.field_pos = ID_AA64PFR0_EL0_SHIFT,
-- 
2.29.0.rc2.309.g374f81d7ae-goog


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-10-27 21:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-27 21:51 [PATCH 0/6] An alternative series for asymmetric AArch32 systems Will Deacon
2020-10-27 21:51 ` [PATCH 1/6] KVM: arm64: Handle Asymmetric " Will Deacon
2020-10-27 21:51 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2020-10-28 11:12   ` [PATCH 2/6] arm64: Allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 support Catalin Marinas
2020-10-28 11:17     ` Will Deacon
2020-10-28 11:22       ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-28 11:23         ` Will Deacon
2020-10-28 11:49           ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-28 12:40             ` Will Deacon
2020-10-28 18:56               ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-29 22:20                 ` Will Deacon
2020-10-30 11:18                   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-30 16:13                     ` Will Deacon
2020-11-02 11:44                       ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-05 21:38                         ` Will Deacon
2020-11-06 12:54                           ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-06 13:00                             ` Will Deacon
2020-11-06 14:48                               ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-09 13:52                                 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-11 16:27                                   ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-12 10:24                                     ` Will Deacon
2020-11-12 11:55                                       ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-12 16:49                                         ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-12 17:06                                           ` Marc Zyngier
2020-11-12 17:36                                             ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-12 17:44                                               ` Will Deacon
2020-11-12 17:36                                           ` Will Deacon
2020-11-13 10:45                                             ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-06 14:30                           ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-28 11:18   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-28 11:21     ` Will Deacon
2020-10-27 21:51 ` [PATCH 3/6] KVM: arm64: Kill 32-bit vCPUs on systems with mismatched " Will Deacon
2020-10-27 21:51 ` [PATCH 4/6] arm64: Kill 32-bit applications scheduled on 64-bit-only CPUs Will Deacon
2020-10-28 12:10   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-28 12:36     ` Will Deacon
2020-10-27 21:51 ` [PATCH 5/6] arm64: Advertise CPUs capable of running 32-bit applcations in sysfs Will Deacon
2020-10-28  8:37   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-10-28  9:51     ` Will Deacon
2020-10-28 12:15   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-28 12:27     ` Will Deacon
2020-10-28 15:14       ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-28 15:35         ` Will Deacon
2020-10-27 21:51 ` [PATCH 6/6] arm64: Hook up cmdline parameter to allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon
2020-10-29 18:42 ` [PATCH 0/6] An alternative series for asymmetric AArch32 systems Suren Baghdasaryan
2020-10-29 22:17   ` Will Deacon
2020-10-30 16:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-10-30 16:24   ` Will Deacon
2020-10-30 17:04     ` 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=20201027215118.27003-3-will@kernel.org \
    --to=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).