linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv2 6/6] efi/runtime-wrappers: detect FW irq flag corruption
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 14:51:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1461333083-15529-7-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461333083-15529-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>

The UEFI spec allows runtime services to be called with interrupts
masked or unmasked, and if a runtime service function needs to mask
interrupts, it must restore the mask to its original state before
returning (i.e. from the PoV of the OS, this does not change across a
call). Firmware should never unmask exceptions, as these may then be
taken by the OS unexpectedly.

Unfortunately, some firmware has been seen to unmask IRQs (and
potentially other maskable exceptions) across runtime services calls,
leaving irq flags corrupted after returning from a runtime services
function call. This may be detected by the IRQ tracing code, but often
goes unnoticed, leaving a potentially disastrous bug hidden.

This patch detects when the irq flags are corrupted by an EFI runtime
services call, logging the call and specific corruption to the console.
While restoring the expected value of the flags is insufficient to avoid
problems, we do so to avoid redundant warnings from elsewhere (e.g. IRQ
tracing).

Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Cc: linux-efi at vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
---
 drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)

I'm not sure about the LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE here. If FW unmasks IRQs there's
the potential for deadlock, but arguably by the time we've detected the flag
corruption the danger has passed. I'm erring on the side of caution here
setting it, but perhaps that's not the best idea?

Mark.

diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
index a2c8e70..19e30b7 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
@@ -16,23 +16,45 @@
 
 #include <linux/bug.h>
 #include <linux/efi.h>
+#include <linux/irqflags.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
 #include <linux/spinlock.h>
+#include <linux/stringify.h>
 #include <asm/efi.h>
 
+static void efi_call_virt_check_flags(unsigned long flags, const char *call)
+{
+	unsigned long cur_flags;
+
+	local_save_flags(cur_flags);
+	if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(cur_flags != flags))
+		return;
+
+	add_taint(TAINT_FIRMWARE_WORKAROUND, LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE);
+	pr_err_ratelimited(FW_BUG "IRQ flags corrupted (0x%08lx=>0x%08lx) by EFI %s\n",
+			   flags, cur_flags, call);
+	local_irq_restore(flags);
+}
+
 #define efi_call_virt(f, args...)					\
 ({									\
 	efi_status_t __s;						\
+	unsigned long flags;						\
 	arch_efi_call_virt_setup();					\
+	local_save_flags(flags);					\
 	__s = arch_efi_call_virt(f, args);				\
+	efi_call_virt_check_flags(flags, __stringify(f));		\
 	arch_efi_call_virt_teardown();					\
 	__s;								\
 })
 
 #define __efi_call_virt(f, args...)					\
 ({									\
+	unsigned long flags;						\
 	arch_efi_call_virt_setup();					\
+	local_save_flags(flags);					\
 	arch_efi_call_virt(f, args);					\
+	efi_call_virt_check_flags(flags, __stringify(f));		\
 	arch_efi_call_virt_teardown();					\
 })
 
-- 
1.9.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-04-22 13:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-22 13:51 [PATCHv2 0/6] efi: detect erroneous firmware IRQ manipulation Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 1/6] efi/runtime-wrappers: add {__,}efi_call_virt templates Mark Rutland
2016-04-24 21:12   ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 2/6] arm64/efi: move to generic {__,}efi_call_virt Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 3/6] arm/efi: " Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 4/6] x86/efi: " Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 5/6] efi/runtime-wrappers: remove redundant ifdefs Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2016-04-24 21:17   ` [PATCHv2 6/6] efi/runtime-wrappers: detect FW irq flag corruption Matt Fleming
2016-04-22 14:12 ` [PATCHv2 0/6] efi: detect erroneous firmware IRQ manipulation Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-24 21:22   ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 10:15     ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 10:21       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-25 10:28         ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 10:40           ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 10:51             ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 11:04               ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 11:19                 ` Matt Fleming

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=1461333083-15529-7-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 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).