From: "Ard Biesheuvel" <ardb@kernel.org>
To: "Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>, "gus bourg" <gus@bourg.net>
Cc: "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Ilias Apalodimas" <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>,
linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/efi: Do not call EFI runtime services preemptibly under SW PAN
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2026 16:56:00 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <30c5499e-8041-4e39-933b-c5220d53be77@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <anXMug2_-vZl_pZ7@willie-the-truck>
On Fri, 7 Aug 2026, at 15:16, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 05:01:44PM -0700, gus bourg wrote:
>> From: Gus Bourg <gus@bourg.net>
>>
>> When PAN is emulated by switching TTBR0_EL1, arch_efi_call_virt_setup()
>> installs the EFI mm into TTBR0_EL1 via uaccess_ttbr0_enable(), and only a
>> return from exception ever puts it back: check_and_switch_context() skips
>> the register write by design ("Defer TTBR0_EL1 setting for user threads to
>> uaccess_enable() when emulating PAN"), and __switch_to() does not touch it
>> either. switch_mm() updates only thread_info->ttbr0.
>>
>> Since commit a5baf582f4c0 ("arm64/efi: Call EFI runtime services without
>> disabling preemption") the runtime call is preemptible, so the EFI worker
>> can now be scheduled out inside that window. An involuntary preemption is
>> harmless, because __swpan_entry_el1()/__swpan_exit_el1() save and restore
>> the state around the exception. A voluntary reschedule is not: it performs
>> no return from exception, so the worker resumes with another task's
>> TTBR0_EL1 - or reserved_pg_dir - and the next efi_mm access takes a level 0
>> translation fault.
>>
>> There is such a preemption point in arch_efi_call_virt_setup() itself,
>> immediately after the TTBR0 install: __efi_fpsimd_begin() ->
>> kernel_neon_begin() -> put_cpu_fpsimd_context() -> local_bh_enable() ->
>> preempt_check_resched().
>
> Hmm, can we move the ttbr0 toggling until after __efi_fpsimd_begin() so
> that this preemption point doesn't interfere?
>
Either that, or tweak the logic so that the switch is done eagerly in
this particular case (untested):
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/context.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/context.c
@@ -266,7 +266,7 @@
* Defer TTBR0_EL1 setting for user threads to uaccess_enable() when
* emulating PAN.
*/
- if (!system_uses_ttbr0_pan())
+ if (!system_uses_ttbr0_pan() || mm_is_efi(mm))
cpu_switch_mm(mm->pgd, mm);
}
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-07 13:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-06 0:01 [PATCH] arm64/efi: Do not call EFI runtime services preemptibly under SW PAN gus bourg
2026-08-07 12:16 ` Will Deacon
2026-08-07 13:56 ` Ard Biesheuvel [this message]
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=30c5499e-8041-4e39-933b-c5220d53be77@app.fastmail.com \
--to=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=gus@bourg.net \
--cc=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox