[PATCH AUTOSEL 6.17-6.16] riscv: cpufeature: add validation for zfa, zfh and zfhmin

[Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>]

From: Clément Léger <cleger@rivosinc.com>

[ Upstream commit 2e2cf5581fccc562f7faf174ffb9866fed5cafbd ]

These extensions depends on the F one. Add a validation callback
checking for the F extension to be present. Now that extensions are
correctly reported using the F/D presence, we can remove the
has_fpu() check in hwprobe_isa_ext0().

Signed-off-by: Clément Léger <cleger@rivosinc.com>
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250527100001.33284-1-cleger@rivosinc.com
Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley <pjw@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---

LLM Generated explanations, may be completely bogus:

Based on my comprehensive analysis of this commit, here is my
assessment:

**Backport Status: YES**

## Extensive Analysis

### What This Commit Fixes

This commit addresses **incorrect CPU feature reporting** for three
RISC-V floating-point extensions (ZFA, ZFH, ZFHMIN) that were being
exposed to userspace without proper validation that their required
dependency (the F extension) is present.

### Code Changes Analysis

The commit makes two key changes:

1. **In arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c (lines 477-480)**:
   - Changes ZFA, ZFH, and ZFHMIN from `__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA` to
     `__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE`
   - Adds `riscv_ext_f_depends` validation callback (lines 83-90) which
     checks that the F extension is available before allowing these
     extensions to be reported
   - The validation function returns `-EPROBE_DEFER` if F is not
     present, preventing incorrect feature reporting

2. **In arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c (lines 156-163)**:
   - Removes the `has_fpu()` conditional check that was previously
     gating these extensions
   - This is safe because the validation is now properly handled in
     cpufeature.c through the validation callbacks

### Why This is a Bug Fix

According to the RISC-V ISA specification:
- **ZFA** (Additional Floating-Point Instructions) requires F
- **ZFH** (Half-Precision Floating-Point) requires F
- **ZFHMIN** (Minimal Half-Precision Floating-Point) requires F

Without this fix, the kernel could incorrectly report these extensions
as available even when the base F extension is not present. This
violates the ISA specification and could lead to:

1. **Incorrect userspace behavior**: Applications using hwprobe() might
   detect these extensions and attempt to use instructions that aren't
   supported
2. **Illegal instruction exceptions**: If userspace tries to execute
   these instructions without F support
3. **Inconsistent CPU capability reporting**: The kernel would report
   capabilities that the hardware doesn't actually support

### Context from Related Commits

This commit is part of a larger validation effort:
- **e186c28dda11e** (Feb 2025): Introduced `riscv_ext_f_depends`
  validation for ZFBFMIN
- **12e7fbb6a84e6** (Mar 2025): Added F & D extension validation checks
- **004961843389e** (Apr 2025): Merged the validation series
- **2e2cf5581fccc** (May 2025): This commit - completes the validation
  by adding it for ZFA/ZFH/ZFHMIN which were missed

The commit message states: "Now that extensions are correctly reported
using the F/D presence, we can remove the has_fpu() check" - indicating
this is cleanup that follows the proper validation infrastructure being
put in place.

### Backporting Criteria Assessment

✅ **Fixes a bug affecting users**: Yes - incorrect CPU feature reporting
can cause userspace applications to malfunction

✅ **Small and contained**: Yes - only 14 lines changed across 2 files,
following an established pattern

✅ **Clear side effects**: No unexpected side effects - makes reporting
more correct

✅ **No architectural changes**: No - uses existing validation
infrastructure

✅ **Minimal regression risk**: Very low - the change makes feature
reporting more conservative (won't report features unless dependencies
are met)

✅ **Confined to subsystem**: Yes - only affects RISC-V architecture code

### Conclusion

This commit should be backported because it:
1. Fixes incorrect CPU capability reporting that violates the RISC-V ISA
   specification
2. Prevents potential illegal instruction exceptions in userspace
3. Is small, focused, and low-risk
4. Follows the stable tree rules for important bug fixes with minimal
   risk
5. Completes a validation series that was already merged upstream

The fix ensures RISC-V systems correctly report their capabilities to
userspace, which is critical for proper system operation.

 arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c  |  6 +++---
 arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c | 14 ++++++--------
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
index 743d53415572e..67b59699357da 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -474,10 +474,10 @@ const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[] = {
 	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zacas, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZACAS),
 	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zalrsc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZALRSC),
 	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zawrs, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZAWRS),
-	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zfa, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZFA),
+	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE(zfa, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZFA, riscv_ext_f_depends),
 	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE(zfbfmin, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZFBFMIN, riscv_ext_f_depends),
-	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zfh, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZFH),
-	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zfhmin, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZFHMIN),
+	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE(zfh, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZFH, riscv_ext_f_depends),
+	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE(zfhmin, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZFHMIN, riscv_ext_f_depends),
 	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zca, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCA),
 	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE(zcb, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCB, riscv_ext_zca_depends),
 	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE(zcd, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCD, riscv_ext_zcd_validate),
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
index 0b170e18a2beb..3e9259790816e 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
@@ -153,14 +153,12 @@ static void hwprobe_isa_ext0(struct riscv_hwprobe *pair,
 			EXT_KEY(ZVKT);
 		}
 
-		if (has_fpu()) {
-			EXT_KEY(ZCD);
-			EXT_KEY(ZCF);
-			EXT_KEY(ZFA);
-			EXT_KEY(ZFBFMIN);
-			EXT_KEY(ZFH);
-			EXT_KEY(ZFHMIN);
-		}
+		EXT_KEY(ZCD);
+		EXT_KEY(ZCF);
+		EXT_KEY(ZFA);
+		EXT_KEY(ZFBFMIN);
+		EXT_KEY(ZFH);
+		EXT_KEY(ZFHMIN);
 
 		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_SUPM))
 			EXT_KEY(SUPM);
-- 
2.51.0


_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv