From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Jain@formenos.rohan.me.apana.org.au, Ayush <Ayush.Jain3@amd.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, x86-ml <x86@kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: lib/sha256 - Disable SIMD
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 12:06:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250516190637.GA32835@sol> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250516181322.GGaCeAQjnIVQx_tX_R@fat_crate.local>
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 08:13:22PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 10:03:16AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > That's silly. We should just fix x86's irq_fpu_usable() to return false
> > before the CPU is properly initialized. It already checks a per-cpu bool, so
> > it shouldn't be too hard to fit that in.
>
> Probably.
>
> There's a fpu__init_cpu() call almost right after load_ucode_ap() which causes
> this thing.
>
> I'm not sure how much initialized stuff you need for SHA256 SIMD... perhaps
> swap fpu__init_cpu() and load_ucode_ap() calls after proper code audit whether
> that's ok.
>
> Or add a "is the FPU initialized" check, as you propose, which is probably
> easier.
>
> As always, the x86 CPU init path is nasty and needs careful auditing.
There are a few different ways in which __apply_microcode_amd() can get called:
__apply_microcode_amd
load_ucode_amd_bsp
load_ucode_bsp
x86_64_start_kernel
apply_microcode_amd
load_ucode_amd_ap
load_ucode_ap
start_secondary
microcode_ops::apply_microcode
load_secondary
__load_primary
reload_ucode_amd
reload_early_microcode
microcode_bsp_resume
mc_syscore_ops::resume
syscore_resume
__restore_processor_state
restore_processor_state
What would you say about going back to my earlier plan to make irq_fpu_usable()
return false when irqs_disabled(), like what arm64 does? (As I had in
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250220051325.340691-2-ebiggers@kernel.org/).
I think that would handle all these cases, as well as others. We'd need to fix
__save_processor_state() to save the FPU state directly without pretending that
it's using kernel-mode FPU, but I don't know of any issues besides that. Then
we could also delete the irqs_disabled() checks that I added to
kernel_fpu_begin() and kernel_fpu_end().
- Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-16 19:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-16 11:22 cryptodev linux-next splat Borislav Petkov
2025-05-16 11:34 ` Herbert Xu
2025-05-16 11:48 ` [PATCH] crypto: lib/sha256 - Disable SIMD Herbert Xu
2025-05-16 12:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-05-16 17:03 ` Eric Biggers
2025-05-16 18:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-05-16 19:06 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2025-05-16 20:34 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=20250516190637.GA32835@sol \
--to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=Ayush.Jain3@amd.com \
--cc=Jain@formenos.rohan.me.apana.org.au \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=x86@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