From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux@arm.linux.org.uk, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
leif.lindholm@linaro.org, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
tglx@linutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/5] efi/runtime-wrappers: detect FW irq flag corruption
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 15:12:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <571E25B1.8070305@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461591994-14918-2-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>
Hi Mark,
On 25/04/16 14:46, Mark Rutland wrote:
> 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).
>
> The set of bits in flags which we want to check is architecture-specific
> (e.g. we want to check FIQ on arm64, but not the zero flag on x86), so
> each arch must provide ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK to describe those. In the
> absence of this mask, the check is a no-op, and we redundantly save the
> flags twice, but that will be short-lived as subsequent patches
> will implement this and remove the scaffolding.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
> Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
> index a2c8e70..1f0277e 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
> @@ -16,23 +16,55 @@
>
> #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>
>
> +/*
> + * Temporary scaffolding until all users provide ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK.
> + */
> +#ifdef ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK
> +static void efi_call_virt_check_flags(unsigned long flags, const char *call)
> +{
> + unsigned long cur_flags;
> + bool mismatch;
> +
> + local_save_flags(cur_flags);
> +
> + mismatch = !!((cur_flags ^ flags) & ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK);
nit: the assignment itself is already a conversion to bool, so the
excitement is redundant here.
Robin.
> + if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(mismatch))
> + 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);
> +}
> +#else /* ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK */
> +static inline void efi_call_virt_check_flags(unsigned long flags, const char *call) {}
> +#endif /* ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK */
> +
> #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(); \
> })
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-25 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-25 13:46 [PATCHv3 0/5] efi: detect erroneous firmware IRQ manipulation Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 13:46 ` [PATCHv3 1/5] efi/runtime-wrappers: detect FW irq flag corruption Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 14:12 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2016-04-25 14:15 ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 14:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-25 14:24 ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 14:27 ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 15:59 ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 16:03 ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 14:33 ` Robin Murphy
2016-04-25 13:46 ` [PATCHv3 2/5] arm64/efi: enable runtime call flag checking Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 13:54 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-25 13:46 ` [PATCHv3 3/5] arm/efi: " Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 13:46 ` [PATCHv3 4/5] x86/efi: " Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 13:46 ` [PATCHv3 5/5] efi/runtime-wrappers: remove ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK ifdef Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 16:03 ` [PATCHv3 0/5] efi: detect erroneous firmware IRQ manipulation 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=571E25B1.8070305@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=leif.lindholm@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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