From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196C3C41604 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 10:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA0D8206BE for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 10:26:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="y2ANsY/e" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org AA0D8206BE Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=nysxWNOKWiAw4pHYC4RaBvQfe+9+1W3Ruyjx0xQ8BOA=; b=y2ANsY/eYIl1VpL6Q2JmMkWp7 YJ5MG3i6u6qy7m8Y5jQeKPkJdpZA4Mjef4iT5vN5NfLDyUzOHkJCDEi0zu7dep1hVaPovrKG29xFU Jh3LnTqhKNewMbX2QSyYdrSKyJi90J/COHscwwoz4BWP8j/KwxVztfRxkejVOg4fVzMsgXiwQv4PJ wj/JnLtnQuryrhFqHRFyip67SEf8jT4QOBtn/BSwc5Dfl5UizH1obP3dmpKniSMSzVbnBMCg9CcZl JgXLx60fbtMwCD/A5GDQ8VVX5xCfZsuVDpl+lwDY/Eb0aAX+1fYlP3ncb9ljA7Vt4SpKzBqG8JDwJ 0UPv29EnQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kPk9o-0006N8-UI; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 10:25:20 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kPk9l-0006Mg-O7 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 10:25:18 +0000 Received: from gaia (unknown [95.149.105.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 496AA20674; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 10:25:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:25:11 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Dave Martin Subject: Re: [BUG][PATCH] crypto: arm64: Avoid indirect branch to bti_c Message-ID: <20201006102507.GA19213@gaia> References: <20201006034854.2277538-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <20201006082748.GB25305@willie-the-truck> <20201006100121.GW6642@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201006100121.GW6642@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201006_062517_862768_0FF7E22B X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 25.85 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeremy Linton , davem@davemloft.net, broonie@kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , ardb@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 11:01:21AM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 09:27:48AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 10:48:54PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > > The AES code uses a 'br x7' as part of a function called by > > > a macro. That branch needs a bti_j as a target. This results > > > in a panic as seen below. Instead of trying to replace the branch > > > target with a bti_jc, lets replace the indirect branch with a > > > bl/ret, bl sequence that can target the existing bti_c. > > > > > > Bad mode in Synchronous Abort handler detected on CPU1, code 0x34000003 -- BTI > > > CPU: 1 PID: 265 Comm: cryptomgr_test Not tainted 5.8.11-300.fc33.aarch64 #1 > > > pstate: 20400c05 (nzCv daif +PAN -UAO BTYPE=j-) > > > pc : aesbs_encrypt8+0x0/0x5f0 [aes_neon_bs] > > > lr : aesbs_xts_encrypt+0x48/0xe0 [aes_neon_bs] > > > sp : ffff80001052b730 > > > > > > aesbs_encrypt8+0x0/0x5f0 [aes_neon_bs] > > > __xts_crypt+0xb0/0x2dc [aes_neon_bs] > > > xts_encrypt+0x28/0x3c [aes_neon_bs] > > > crypto_skcipher_encrypt+0x50/0x84 > > > simd_skcipher_encrypt+0xc8/0xe0 > > > crypto_skcipher_encrypt+0x50/0x84 > > > test_skcipher_vec_cfg+0x224/0x5f0 > > > test_skcipher+0xbc/0x120 > > > alg_test_skcipher+0xa0/0x1b0 > > > alg_test+0x3dc/0x47c > > > cryptomgr_test+0x38/0x60 > > > > > > Fixes: commit 0e89640b640d ("crypto: arm64 - Use modern annotations for assembly functions") > > > > nit: the "commit" string shouldn't be here, and I think the linux-next > > scripts will yell at us if we don't remove it. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton > > > --- > > > arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S | 6 +++--- > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S b/arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S > > > index b357164379f6..32f53ebe5e2c 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S > > > @@ -788,7 +788,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START_LOCAL(__xts_crypt8) > > > > > > 0: mov bskey, x21 > > > mov rounds, x22 > > > - br x7 > > > + ret > > Dang, replied on an old version. Which I ignored (by default, when the kbuild test robot complains ;)). > Since this is logically a tail call, could we simply be using br x16 or > br x17 for this? > > The architecture makes special provision for that so that the compiler > can generate tail-calls. So a "br x16" is compatible with a bti_c landing pad. I think it makes more sense to keep it as a tail call. -- Catalin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel