* [patch V3 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-13 15:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-16 9:03 ` Chang S. Bae
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 02/30] x86/boot/32: Disable stackprotector and tracing for mk_early_pgtbl_32() Thomas Gleixner
` (30 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 2 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML
Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov, Fenghua Yu, Peter Anvin
32-bit loads microcode before paging is enabled. The commit which
introduced that has zero justification in the changelog. The cover letter
has slightly more content, but it does not give any technical justification
either:
"The problem in current microcode loading method is that we load a
microcode way, way too late; ideally we should load it before turning
paging on. This may only be practical on 32 bits since we can't get to
64-bit mode without paging on, but we should still do it as early as at
all possible."
Handwaving word salad with zero technical content.
Someone claimed in an offlist conversation that this is required for curing
the ATOM erratum AAE44/AAF40/AAG38/AAH41. That erratum requires an
microcode update in order to make the usage of PSE safe. But during early
boot PSE is completely irrelevant and it is evaluated way later.
Neither is it relevant for the AP on single core HT enabled CPUs as the
microcode loading on the AP is not doing anything.
On dual core CPUs there is a theoretical problem if a split of an
executable large page between enabling paging including PSE and loading the
microcode happens. But that's only theoretical, it's practically irrelevant
because the affected dual core CPUs are 64bit enabled and therefore have
paging and PSE enabled before loading the microcode on the second core. So
why would it work on 64-bit but not on 32-bit?
The erratum:
"AAG38 Code Fetch May Occur to Incorrect Address After a Large Page is
Split Into 4-Kbyte Pages
Problem: If software clears the PS (page size) bit in a present PDE
(page directory entry), that will cause linear addresses mapped through
this PDE to use 4-KByte pages instead of using a large page after old
TLB entries are invalidated. Due to this erratum, if a code fetch uses
this PDE before the TLB entry for the large page is invalidated then it
may fetch from a different physical address than specified by either the
old large page translation or the new 4-KByte page translation. This
erratum may also cause speculative code fetches from incorrect addresses."
The practical relevance for this is exactly zero because there is no
splitting of large text pages during early boot-time, i.e. between paging
enable and microcode loading, and neither during CPU hotplug.
IOW, this load microcode before paging enable is yet another voodoo
programming solution in search of a problem. What's worse is that it causes
at least two serious problems:
1) When stackprotector is enabled then the microcode loader code has the
stackprotector mechanics enabled. The read from the per CPU variable
__stack_chk_guard is always accessing the virtual address either
directly on UP or via FS on SMP. In physical address mode this results
in an access to memory above 3GB. So this works by chance as the
hardware returns the same value when there is no RAM at this physical
address. When there is RAM populated above 3G then the read is by
chance the same as nothing changes that memory during the very early
boot stage. That's not necessarily true during runtime CPU hotplug.
2) When function tracing is enabled, then the relevant microcode loader
functions and the functions invoked from there will call into the
tracing code and evaluate global and per CPU variables in physical
address mode. What could potentially go wrong?
Cure this and move the microcode loading after the early paging enable and
remove the gunk in the microcode loader which is required to handle
physical address mode.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1356075872-3054-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com
---
arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h | 5 -
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 12 ---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 31 +-------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 73 ++++----------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 108 +++----------------------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 2
arch/x86/kernel/head32.c | 3
arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S | 10 --
arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 12 +--
9 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 215 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
@@ -68,11 +68,6 @@ static inline u32 intel_get_microcode_re
return rev;
}
-
-void show_ucode_info_early(void);
-
-#else /* CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL */
-static inline void show_ucode_info_early(void) { }
#endif /* !CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL */
#endif /* _ASM_X86_MICROCODE_H */
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
@@ -2123,8 +2123,6 @@ static inline void setup_getcpu(int cpu)
}
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
-static inline void ucode_cpu_init(int cpu) { }
-
static inline void tss_setup_ist(struct tss_struct *tss)
{
/* Set up the per-CPU TSS IST stacks */
@@ -2135,16 +2133,8 @@ static inline void tss_setup_ist(struct
/* Only mapped when SEV-ES is active */
tss->x86_tss.ist[IST_INDEX_VC] = __this_cpu_ist_top_va(VC);
}
-
#else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
-
-static inline void ucode_cpu_init(int cpu)
-{
- show_ucode_info_early();
-}
-
static inline void tss_setup_ist(struct tss_struct *tss) { }
-
#endif /* !CONFIG_X86_64 */
static inline void tss_setup_io_bitmap(struct tss_struct *tss)
@@ -2200,8 +2190,6 @@ void cpu_init(void)
struct task_struct *cur = current;
int cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
- ucode_cpu_init(cpu);
-
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
if (this_cpu_read(numa_node) == 0 &&
early_cpu_to_node(cpu) != NUMA_NO_NODE)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -456,14 +456,8 @@ static bool early_apply_microcode(u32 cp
{
struct cont_desc desc = { 0 };
struct microcode_amd *mc;
- u32 rev, dummy, *new_rev;
bool ret = false;
-
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
- new_rev = (u32 *)__pa_nodebug(&ucode_new_rev);
-#else
- new_rev = &ucode_new_rev;
-#endif
+ u32 rev, dummy;
desc.cpuid_1_eax = cpuid_1_eax;
@@ -484,8 +478,8 @@ static bool early_apply_microcode(u32 cp
return ret;
if (!__apply_microcode_amd(mc)) {
- *new_rev = mc->hdr.patch_id;
- ret = true;
+ ucode_new_rev = mc->hdr.patch_id;
+ ret = true;
}
return ret;
@@ -514,26 +508,13 @@ static bool get_builtin_microcode(struct
static void find_blobs_in_containers(unsigned int cpuid_1_eax, struct cpio_data *ret)
{
- struct ucode_cpu_info *uci;
struct cpio_data cp;
- const char *path;
- bool use_pa;
-
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32)) {
- uci = (struct ucode_cpu_info *)__pa_nodebug(ucode_cpu_info);
- path = (const char *)__pa_nodebug(ucode_path);
- use_pa = true;
- } else {
- uci = ucode_cpu_info;
- path = ucode_path;
- use_pa = false;
- }
if (!get_builtin_microcode(&cp, x86_family(cpuid_1_eax)))
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(path, use_pa);
+ cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
/* Needed in load_microcode_amd() */
- uci->cpu_sig.sig = cpuid_1_eax;
+ ucode_cpu_info->cpu_sig.sig = cpuid_1_eax;
*ret = cp;
}
@@ -562,7 +543,7 @@ int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_amd(
enum ucode_state ret;
struct cpio_data cp;
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path, false);
+ cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return -EINVAL;
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -90,10 +90,7 @@ static bool amd_check_current_patch_leve
native_rdmsr(MSR_AMD64_PATCH_LEVEL, lvl, dummy);
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
- levels = (u32 *)__pa_nodebug(&final_levels);
- else
- levels = final_levels;
+ levels = final_levels;
for (i = 0; levels[i]; i++) {
if (lvl == levels[i])
@@ -105,17 +102,8 @@ static bool amd_check_current_patch_leve
static bool __init check_loader_disabled_bsp(void)
{
static const char *__dis_opt_str = "dis_ucode_ldr";
-
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
- const char *cmdline = (const char *)__pa_nodebug(boot_command_line);
- const char *option = (const char *)__pa_nodebug(__dis_opt_str);
- bool *res = (bool *)__pa_nodebug(&dis_ucode_ldr);
-
-#else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
const char *cmdline = boot_command_line;
const char *option = __dis_opt_str;
- bool *res = &dis_ucode_ldr;
-#endif
/*
* CPUID(1).ECX[31]: reserved for hypervisor use. This is still not
@@ -123,17 +111,17 @@ static bool __init check_loader_disabled
* that's good enough as they don't land on the BSP path anyway.
*/
if (native_cpuid_ecx(1) & BIT(31))
- return *res;
+ return true;
if (x86_cpuid_vendor() == X86_VENDOR_AMD) {
if (amd_check_current_patch_level())
- return *res;
+ return true;
}
if (cmdline_find_option_bool(cmdline, option) <= 0)
- *res = false;
+ dis_ucode_ldr = false;
- return *res;
+ return dis_ucode_ldr;
}
void __init load_ucode_bsp(void)
@@ -171,20 +159,11 @@ void __init load_ucode_bsp(void)
load_ucode_amd_early(cpuid_1_eax);
}
-static bool check_loader_disabled_ap(void)
-{
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
- return *((bool *)__pa_nodebug(&dis_ucode_ldr));
-#else
- return dis_ucode_ldr;
-#endif
-}
-
void load_ucode_ap(void)
{
unsigned int cpuid_1_eax;
- if (check_loader_disabled_ap())
+ if (dis_ucode_ldr)
return;
cpuid_1_eax = native_cpuid_eax(1);
@@ -226,40 +205,31 @@ static int __init save_microcode_in_init
return ret;
}
-struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path, bool use_pa)
+struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD
unsigned long start = 0;
size_t size;
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
- struct boot_params *params;
-
- if (use_pa)
- params = (struct boot_params *)__pa_nodebug(&boot_params);
- else
- params = &boot_params;
-
- size = params->hdr.ramdisk_size;
-
+ size = boot_params.hdr.ramdisk_size;
/*
* Set start only if we have an initrd image. We cannot use initrd_start
* because it is not set that early yet.
*/
if (size)
- start = params->hdr.ramdisk_image;
+ start = boot_params.hdr.ramdisk_image;
-# else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
+#else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
size = (unsigned long)boot_params.ext_ramdisk_size << 32;
size |= boot_params.hdr.ramdisk_size;
if (size) {
start = (unsigned long)boot_params.ext_ramdisk_image << 32;
start |= boot_params.hdr.ramdisk_image;
-
start += PAGE_OFFSET;
}
-# endif
+#endif
/*
* Fixup the start address: after reserve_initrd() runs, initrd_start
@@ -270,23 +240,10 @@ struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initr
* initrd_gone is for the hotplug case where we've thrown out initrd
* already.
*/
- if (!use_pa) {
- if (initrd_gone)
- return (struct cpio_data){ NULL, 0, "" };
- if (initrd_start)
- start = initrd_start;
- } else {
- /*
- * The picture with physical addresses is a bit different: we
- * need to get the *physical* address to which the ramdisk was
- * relocated, i.e., relocated_ramdisk (not initrd_start) and
- * since we're running from physical addresses, we need to access
- * relocated_ramdisk through its *physical* address too.
- */
- u64 *rr = (u64 *)__pa_nodebug(&relocated_ramdisk);
- if (*rr)
- start = *rr;
- }
+ if (initrd_gone)
+ return (struct cpio_data){ NULL, 0, "" };
+ if (initrd_start)
+ start = initrd_start;
return find_cpio_data(path, (void *)start, size, NULL);
#else /* !CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD */
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -319,15 +319,8 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(struct
if (!intel_find_matching_signature(p->data, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
return;
- /*
- * Save for early loading. On 32-bit, that needs to be a physical
- * address as the APs are running from physical addresses, before
- * paging has been enabled.
- */
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
- intel_ucode_patch = (struct microcode_intel *)__pa_nodebug(p->data);
- else
- intel_ucode_patch = p->data;
+ /* Save for early loading */
+ intel_ucode_patch = p->data;
}
/*
@@ -420,66 +413,10 @@ static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode
return false;
}
-static void print_ucode_info(int old_rev, int new_rev, unsigned int date)
-{
- pr_info_once("updated early: 0x%x -> 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
- old_rev,
- new_rev,
- date & 0xffff,
- date >> 24,
- (date >> 16) & 0xff);
-}
-
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
-
-static int delay_ucode_info;
-static int current_mc_date;
-static int early_old_rev;
-
-/*
- * Print early updated ucode info after printk works. This is delayed info dump.
- */
-void show_ucode_info_early(void)
-{
- struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
-
- if (delay_ucode_info) {
- intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
- print_ucode_info(early_old_rev, uci.cpu_sig.rev, current_mc_date);
- delay_ucode_info = 0;
- }
-}
-
-/*
- * At this point, we can not call printk() yet. Delay printing microcode info in
- * show_ucode_info_early() until printk() works.
- */
-static void print_ucode(int old_rev, int new_rev, int date)
-{
- int *delay_ucode_info_p;
- int *current_mc_date_p;
- int *early_old_rev_p;
-
- delay_ucode_info_p = (int *)__pa_nodebug(&delay_ucode_info);
- current_mc_date_p = (int *)__pa_nodebug(¤t_mc_date);
- early_old_rev_p = (int *)__pa_nodebug(&early_old_rev);
-
- *delay_ucode_info_p = 1;
- *current_mc_date_p = date;
- *early_old_rev_p = old_rev;
-}
-#else
-
-static inline void print_ucode(int old_rev, int new_rev, int date)
-{
- print_ucode_info(old_rev, new_rev, date);
-}
-#endif
-
static int apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
{
struct microcode_intel *mc;
- u32 rev, old_rev;
+ u32 rev, old_rev, date;
mc = uci->mc;
if (!mc)
@@ -513,11 +450,9 @@ static int apply_microcode_early(struct
uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev;
- if (early)
- print_ucode(old_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
- else
- print_ucode_info(old_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
-
+ date = mc->hdr.date;
+ pr_info_once("updated early: 0x%x -> 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
+ old_rev, rev, date & 0xffff, date >> 24, (date >> 16) & 0xff);
return 0;
}
@@ -535,7 +470,7 @@ int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_inte
intel_ucode_patch = NULL;
if (!load_builtin_intel_microcode(&cp))
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path, false);
+ cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return 0;
@@ -551,21 +486,11 @@ int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_inte
*/
static struct microcode_intel *__load_ucode_intel(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
{
- static const char *path;
struct cpio_data cp;
- bool use_pa;
-
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32)) {
- path = (const char *)__pa_nodebug(ucode_path);
- use_pa = true;
- } else {
- path = ucode_path;
- use_pa = false;
- }
/* try built-in microcode first */
if (!load_builtin_intel_microcode(&cp))
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(path, use_pa);
+ cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return NULL;
@@ -591,24 +516,15 @@ void __init load_ucode_intel_bsp(void)
void load_ucode_intel_ap(void)
{
- struct microcode_intel *patch, **iup;
struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
- iup = (struct microcode_intel **) __pa_nodebug(&intel_ucode_patch);
- else
- iup = &intel_ucode_patch;
-
- if (!*iup) {
- patch = __load_ucode_intel(&uci);
- if (!patch)
+ if (!intel_ucode_patch) {
+ intel_ucode_patch = __load_ucode_intel(&uci);
+ if (!intel_ucode_patch)
return;
-
- *iup = patch;
}
- uci.mc = *iup;
-
+ uci.mc = intel_ucode_patch;
apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
}
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ struct microcode_ops {
};
extern struct ucode_cpu_info ucode_cpu_info[];
-struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path, bool use_pa);
+struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path);
#define MAX_UCODE_COUNT 128
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/head32.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head32.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include <asm/apic.h>
#include <asm/io_apic.h>
#include <asm/bios_ebda.h>
+#include <asm/microcode.h>
#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
#include <asm/bootparam_utils.h>
@@ -34,6 +35,8 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __init __noret
/* Make sure IDT is set up before any exception happens */
idt_setup_early_handler();
+ load_ucode_bsp();
+
cr4_init_shadow();
sanitize_boot_params(&boot_params);
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S
@@ -118,11 +118,6 @@ SYM_CODE_START(startup_32)
movl %eax, pa(olpc_ofw_pgd)
#endif
-#ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE
- /* Early load ucode on BSP. */
- call load_ucode_bsp
-#endif
-
/* Create early pagetables. */
call mk_early_pgtbl_32
@@ -157,11 +152,6 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(startup_32_smp)
movl %eax,%ss
leal -__PAGE_OFFSET(%ecx),%esp
-#ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE
- /* Early load ucode on AP. */
- call load_ucode_ap
-#endif
-
.Ldefault_entry:
movl $(CR0_STATE & ~X86_CR0_PG),%eax
movl %eax,%cr0
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -258,12 +258,9 @@ static void notrace start_secondary(void
cpu_init_exception_handling();
/*
- * 32-bit systems load the microcode from the ASM startup code for
- * historical reasons.
- *
- * On 64-bit systems load it before reaching the AP alive
- * synchronization point below so it is not part of the full per
- * CPU serialized bringup part when "parallel" bringup is enabled.
+ * Load the microcode before reaching the AP alive synchronization
+ * point below so it is not part of the full per CPU serialized
+ * bringup part when "parallel" bringup is enabled.
*
* That's even safe when hyperthreading is enabled in the CPU as
* the core code starts the primary threads first and leaves the
@@ -276,8 +273,7 @@ static void notrace start_secondary(void
* CPUID, MSRs etc. must be strictly serialized to maintain
* software state correctness.
*/
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64))
- load_ucode_ap();
+ load_ucode_ap();
/*
* Synchronization point with the hotplug core. Sets this CPUs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-13 15:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-16 9:03 ` Chang S. Bae
1 sibling, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-13 15:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner, Fenghua Yu, Peter Anvin
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:44AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 32-bit loads microcode before paging is enabled. The commit which
> introduced that has zero justification in the changelog. The cover letter
> has slightly more content, but it does not give any technical justification
> either:
>
> "The problem in current microcode loading method is that we load a
> microcode way, way too late; ideally we should load it before turning
> paging on. This may only be practical on 32 bits since we can't get to
> 64-bit mode without paging on, but we should still do it as early as at
> all possible."
>
> Handwaving word salad with zero technical content.
>
> Someone claimed in an offlist conversation that this is required for curing
> the ATOM erratum AAE44/AAF40/AAG38/AAH41. That erratum requires an
> microcode update in order to make the usage of PSE safe. But during early
> boot PSE is completely irrelevant and it is evaluated way later.
...
> Cure this and move the microcode loading after the early paging enable and
> remove the gunk in the microcode loader which is required to handle
> physical address mode.
That same someone from the offlist conversation loves this change - 32-bit
PA loading gunk has been a major PITA ever since it got added - just
look at the code you're removing and cringe.
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> Cc: Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
I guess those gents could chime in now - lemme put them in To:, perhaps
they'll look at this then.
If not, I'd say we do this. The erratum in question is for pretty much
dying hw anyway - Atom n270 of which I actually have *two* machines
even. I can "accidentally" drop them on the concrete floor while
carrying and problem solved => dying hardware.
:-P
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-13 15:06 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-09-16 9:03 ` Chang S. Bae
2023-09-17 19:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Chang S. Bae @ 2023-09-16 9:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner, LKML
Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov,
Fenghua Yu, Peter Anvin
On 9/12/2023 12:57 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> static int apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
> {
...
> - if (early)
> - print_ucode(old_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
> - else
> - print_ucode_info(old_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
> -
Nitpick:
with this change, there is no need for the second argument -- 'bool early'.
Thanks,
Chang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable
2023-09-16 9:03 ` Chang S. Bae
@ 2023-09-17 19:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-19 14:54 ` [patch V3a " Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-17 19:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chang S. Bae, LKML
Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov,
Fenghua Yu, Peter Anvin
On Sat, Sep 16 2023 at 02:03, Chang S. Bae wrote:
> On 9/12/2023 12:57 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>> static int apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
>> {
> ...
>> - if (early)
>> - print_ucode(old_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
>> - else
>> - print_ucode_info(old_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
>> -
>
> Nitpick:
>
> with this change, there is no need for the second argument -- 'bool early'.
Duh. Yes ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3a 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable
2023-09-17 19:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-19 14:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-19 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chang S. Bae, LKML
Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov,
Fenghua Yu, Peter Anvin
32-bit loads microcode before paging is enabled. The commit which
introduced that has zero justification in the changelog. The cover letter
has slightly more content, but it does not give any technical justification
either:
"The problem in current microcode loading method is that we load a
microcode way, way too late; ideally we should load it before turning
paging on. This may only be practical on 32 bits since we can't get to
64-bit mode without paging on, but we should still do it as early as at
all possible."
Handwaving word salad with zero technical content.
Someone claimed in an offlist conversation that this is required for curing
the ATOM erratum AAE44/AAF40/AAG38/AAH41. That erratum requires an
microcode update in order to make the usage of PSE safe. But during early
boot PSE is completely irrelevant and it is evaluated way later.
Neither is it relevant for the AP on single core HT enabled CPUs as the
microcode loading on the AP is not doing anything.
On dual core CPUs there is a theoretical problem if a split of an
executable large page between enabling paging including PSE and loading the
microcode happens. But that's only theoretical, it's practically irrelevant
because the affected dual core CPUs are 64bit enabled and therefore have
paging and PSE enabled before loading the microcode on the second core. So
why would it work on 64-bit but not on 32-bit?
The erratum:
"AAG38 Code Fetch May Occur to Incorrect Address After a Large Page is
Split Into 4-Kbyte Pages
Problem: If software clears the PS (page size) bit in a present PDE
(page directory entry), that will cause linear addresses mapped through
this PDE to use 4-KByte pages instead of using a large page after old
TLB entries are invalidated. Due to this erratum, if a code fetch uses
this PDE before the TLB entry for the large page is invalidated then it
may fetch from a different physical address than specified by either the
old large page translation or the new 4-KByte page translation. This
erratum may also cause speculative code fetches from incorrect addresses."
The practical relevance for this is exactly zero because there is no
splitting of large text pages during early boot-time, i.e. between paging
enable and microcode loading, and neither during CPU hotplug.
IOW, this load microcode before paging enable is yet another voodoo
programming solution in search of a problem. What's worse is that it causes
at least two serious problems:
1) When stackprotector is enabled then the microcode loader code has the
stackprotector mechanics enabled. The read from the per CPU variable
__stack_chk_guard is always accessing the virtual address either
directly on UP or via FS on SMP. In physical address mode this results
in an access to memory above 3GB. So this works by chance as the
hardware returns the same value when there is no RAM at this physical
address. When there is RAM populated above 3G then the read is by
chance the same as nothing changes that memory during the very early
boot stage. That's not necessarily true during runtime CPU hotplug.
2) When function tracing is enabled, then the relevant microcode loader
functions and the functions invoked from there will call into the
tracing code and evaluate global and per CPU variables in physical
address mode. What could potentially go wrong?
Cure this and move the microcode loading after the early paging enable and
remove the gunk in the microcode loader which is required to handle
physical address mode.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1356075872-3054-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com
---
V3a: Remove the early arguments - Chang
Fixup the core code - 0day
---
arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h | 5 -
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 12 ---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 103 ++++++++-------------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 73 ++++---------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 116 ++++---------------------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 2
arch/x86/kernel/head32.c | 3
arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S | 10 --
arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 12 +--
9 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 265 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
@@ -68,11 +68,6 @@ static inline u32 intel_get_microcode_re
return rev;
}
-
-void show_ucode_info_early(void);
-
-#else /* CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL */
-static inline void show_ucode_info_early(void) { }
#endif /* !CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL */
#endif /* _ASM_X86_MICROCODE_H */
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
@@ -2166,8 +2166,6 @@ static inline void setup_getcpu(int cpu)
}
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
-static inline void ucode_cpu_init(int cpu) { }
-
static inline void tss_setup_ist(struct tss_struct *tss)
{
/* Set up the per-CPU TSS IST stacks */
@@ -2178,16 +2176,8 @@ static inline void tss_setup_ist(struct
/* Only mapped when SEV-ES is active */
tss->x86_tss.ist[IST_INDEX_VC] = __this_cpu_ist_top_va(VC);
}
-
#else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
-
-static inline void ucode_cpu_init(int cpu)
-{
- show_ucode_info_early();
-}
-
static inline void tss_setup_ist(struct tss_struct *tss) { }
-
#endif /* !CONFIG_X86_64 */
static inline void tss_setup_io_bitmap(struct tss_struct *tss)
@@ -2243,8 +2233,6 @@ void cpu_init(void)
struct task_struct *cur = current;
int cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
- ucode_cpu_init(cpu);
-
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
if (this_cpu_read(numa_node) == 0 &&
early_cpu_to_node(cpu) != NUMA_NO_NODE)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -121,24 +121,20 @@ static u16 find_equiv_id(struct equiv_cp
/*
* Check whether there is a valid microcode container file at the beginning
- * of @buf of size @buf_size. Set @early to use this function in the early path.
+ * of @buf of size @buf_size.
*/
-static bool verify_container(const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size, bool early)
+static bool verify_container(const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size)
{
u32 cont_magic;
if (buf_size <= CONTAINER_HDR_SZ) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Truncated microcode container header.\n");
-
+ pr_debug("Truncated microcode container header.\n");
return false;
}
cont_magic = *(const u32 *)buf;
if (cont_magic != UCODE_MAGIC) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Invalid magic value (0x%08x).\n", cont_magic);
-
+ pr_debug("Invalid magic value (0x%08x).\n", cont_magic);
return false;
}
@@ -147,23 +143,20 @@ static bool verify_container(const u8 *b
/*
* Check whether there is a valid, non-truncated CPU equivalence table at the
- * beginning of @buf of size @buf_size. Set @early to use this function in the
- * early path.
+ * beginning of @buf of size @buf_size.
*/
-static bool verify_equivalence_table(const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size, bool early)
+static bool verify_equivalence_table(const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size)
{
const u32 *hdr = (const u32 *)buf;
u32 cont_type, equiv_tbl_len;
- if (!verify_container(buf, buf_size, early))
+ if (!verify_container(buf, buf_size))
return false;
cont_type = hdr[1];
if (cont_type != UCODE_EQUIV_CPU_TABLE_TYPE) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Wrong microcode container equivalence table type: %u.\n",
- cont_type);
-
+ pr_debug("Wrong microcode container equivalence table type: %u.\n",
+ cont_type);
return false;
}
@@ -172,9 +165,7 @@ static bool verify_equivalence_table(con
equiv_tbl_len = hdr[2];
if (equiv_tbl_len < sizeof(struct equiv_cpu_entry) ||
buf_size < equiv_tbl_len) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Truncated equivalence table.\n");
-
+ pr_debug("Truncated equivalence table.\n");
return false;
}
@@ -183,22 +174,19 @@ static bool verify_equivalence_table(con
/*
* Check whether there is a valid, non-truncated microcode patch section at the
- * beginning of @buf of size @buf_size. Set @early to use this function in the
- * early path.
+ * beginning of @buf of size @buf_size.
*
* On success, @sh_psize returns the patch size according to the section header,
* to the caller.
*/
static bool
-__verify_patch_section(const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size, u32 *sh_psize, bool early)
+__verify_patch_section(const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size, u32 *sh_psize)
{
u32 p_type, p_size;
const u32 *hdr;
if (buf_size < SECTION_HDR_SIZE) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Truncated patch section.\n");
-
+ pr_debug("Truncated patch section.\n");
return false;
}
@@ -207,17 +195,13 @@ static bool
p_size = hdr[1];
if (p_type != UCODE_UCODE_TYPE) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Invalid type field (0x%x) in container file section header.\n",
- p_type);
-
+ pr_debug("Invalid type field (0x%x) in container file section header.\n",
+ p_type);
return false;
}
if (p_size < sizeof(struct microcode_header_amd)) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Patch of size %u too short.\n", p_size);
-
+ pr_debug("Patch of size %u too short.\n", p_size);
return false;
}
@@ -269,7 +253,7 @@ static unsigned int __verify_patch_size(
* 0: success
*/
static int
-verify_patch(u8 family, const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size, u32 *patch_size, bool early)
+verify_patch(u8 family, const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size, u32 *patch_size)
{
struct microcode_header_amd *mc_hdr;
unsigned int ret;
@@ -277,7 +261,7 @@ verify_patch(u8 family, const u8 *buf, s
u16 proc_id;
u8 patch_fam;
- if (!__verify_patch_section(buf, buf_size, &sh_psize, early))
+ if (!__verify_patch_section(buf, buf_size, &sh_psize))
return -1;
/*
@@ -292,16 +276,13 @@ verify_patch(u8 family, const u8 *buf, s
* size sh_psize, as the section claims.
*/
if (buf_size < sh_psize) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Patch of size %u truncated.\n", sh_psize);
-
+ pr_debug("Patch of size %u truncated.\n", sh_psize);
return -1;
}
ret = __verify_patch_size(family, sh_psize, buf_size);
if (!ret) {
- if (!early)
- pr_debug("Per-family patch size mismatch.\n");
+ pr_debug("Per-family patch size mismatch.\n");
return -1;
}
@@ -309,8 +290,7 @@ verify_patch(u8 family, const u8 *buf, s
mc_hdr = (struct microcode_header_amd *)(buf + SECTION_HDR_SIZE);
if (mc_hdr->nb_dev_id || mc_hdr->sb_dev_id) {
- if (!early)
- pr_err("Patch-ID 0x%08x: chipset-specific code unsupported.\n", mc_hdr->patch_id);
+ pr_err("Patch-ID 0x%08x: chipset-specific code unsupported.\n", mc_hdr->patch_id);
return -1;
}
@@ -337,7 +317,7 @@ static size_t parse_container(u8 *ucode,
u16 eq_id;
u8 *buf;
- if (!verify_equivalence_table(ucode, size, true))
+ if (!verify_equivalence_table(ucode, size))
return 0;
buf = ucode;
@@ -364,7 +344,7 @@ static size_t parse_container(u8 *ucode,
u32 patch_size;
int ret;
- ret = verify_patch(x86_family(desc->cpuid_1_eax), buf, size, &patch_size, true);
+ ret = verify_patch(x86_family(desc->cpuid_1_eax), buf, size, &patch_size);
if (ret < 0) {
/*
* Patch verification failed, skip to the next container, if
@@ -456,14 +436,8 @@ static bool early_apply_microcode(u32 cp
{
struct cont_desc desc = { 0 };
struct microcode_amd *mc;
- u32 rev, dummy, *new_rev;
bool ret = false;
-
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
- new_rev = (u32 *)__pa_nodebug(&ucode_new_rev);
-#else
- new_rev = &ucode_new_rev;
-#endif
+ u32 rev, dummy;
desc.cpuid_1_eax = cpuid_1_eax;
@@ -484,8 +458,8 @@ static bool early_apply_microcode(u32 cp
return ret;
if (!__apply_microcode_amd(mc)) {
- *new_rev = mc->hdr.patch_id;
- ret = true;
+ ucode_new_rev = mc->hdr.patch_id;
+ ret = true;
}
return ret;
@@ -514,26 +488,13 @@ static bool get_builtin_microcode(struct
static void find_blobs_in_containers(unsigned int cpuid_1_eax, struct cpio_data *ret)
{
- struct ucode_cpu_info *uci;
struct cpio_data cp;
- const char *path;
- bool use_pa;
-
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32)) {
- uci = (struct ucode_cpu_info *)__pa_nodebug(ucode_cpu_info);
- path = (const char *)__pa_nodebug(ucode_path);
- use_pa = true;
- } else {
- uci = ucode_cpu_info;
- path = ucode_path;
- use_pa = false;
- }
if (!get_builtin_microcode(&cp, x86_family(cpuid_1_eax)))
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(path, use_pa);
+ cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
/* Needed in load_microcode_amd() */
- uci->cpu_sig.sig = cpuid_1_eax;
+ ucode_cpu_info->cpu_sig.sig = cpuid_1_eax;
*ret = cp;
}
@@ -562,7 +523,7 @@ int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_amd(
enum ucode_state ret;
struct cpio_data cp;
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path, false);
+ cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return -EINVAL;
@@ -738,7 +699,7 @@ static size_t install_equiv_cpu_table(co
u32 equiv_tbl_len;
const u32 *hdr;
- if (!verify_equivalence_table(buf, buf_size, false))
+ if (!verify_equivalence_table(buf, buf_size))
return 0;
hdr = (const u32 *)buf;
@@ -784,7 +745,7 @@ static int verify_and_add_patch(u8 famil
u16 proc_id;
int ret;
- ret = verify_patch(family, fw, leftover, patch_size, false);
+ ret = verify_patch(family, fw, leftover, patch_size);
if (ret)
return ret;
@@ -918,7 +879,7 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcod
}
ret = UCODE_ERROR;
- if (!verify_container(fw->data, fw->size, false))
+ if (!verify_container(fw->data, fw->size))
goto fw_release;
ret = load_microcode_amd(c->x86, fw->data, fw->size);
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -90,10 +90,7 @@ static bool amd_check_current_patch_leve
native_rdmsr(MSR_AMD64_PATCH_LEVEL, lvl, dummy);
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
- levels = (u32 *)__pa_nodebug(&final_levels);
- else
- levels = final_levels;
+ levels = final_levels;
for (i = 0; levels[i]; i++) {
if (lvl == levels[i])
@@ -105,17 +102,8 @@ static bool amd_check_current_patch_leve
static bool __init check_loader_disabled_bsp(void)
{
static const char *__dis_opt_str = "dis_ucode_ldr";
-
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
- const char *cmdline = (const char *)__pa_nodebug(boot_command_line);
- const char *option = (const char *)__pa_nodebug(__dis_opt_str);
- bool *res = (bool *)__pa_nodebug(&dis_ucode_ldr);
-
-#else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
const char *cmdline = boot_command_line;
const char *option = __dis_opt_str;
- bool *res = &dis_ucode_ldr;
-#endif
/*
* CPUID(1).ECX[31]: reserved for hypervisor use. This is still not
@@ -123,17 +111,17 @@ static bool __init check_loader_disabled
* that's good enough as they don't land on the BSP path anyway.
*/
if (native_cpuid_ecx(1) & BIT(31))
- return *res;
+ return true;
if (x86_cpuid_vendor() == X86_VENDOR_AMD) {
if (amd_check_current_patch_level())
- return *res;
+ return true;
}
if (cmdline_find_option_bool(cmdline, option) <= 0)
- *res = false;
+ dis_ucode_ldr = false;
- return *res;
+ return dis_ucode_ldr;
}
void __init load_ucode_bsp(void)
@@ -171,20 +159,11 @@ void __init load_ucode_bsp(void)
load_ucode_amd_early(cpuid_1_eax);
}
-static bool check_loader_disabled_ap(void)
-{
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
- return *((bool *)__pa_nodebug(&dis_ucode_ldr));
-#else
- return dis_ucode_ldr;
-#endif
-}
-
void load_ucode_ap(void)
{
unsigned int cpuid_1_eax;
- if (check_loader_disabled_ap())
+ if (dis_ucode_ldr)
return;
cpuid_1_eax = native_cpuid_eax(1);
@@ -226,40 +205,31 @@ static int __init save_microcode_in_init
return ret;
}
-struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path, bool use_pa)
+struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD
unsigned long start = 0;
size_t size;
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
- struct boot_params *params;
-
- if (use_pa)
- params = (struct boot_params *)__pa_nodebug(&boot_params);
- else
- params = &boot_params;
-
- size = params->hdr.ramdisk_size;
-
+ size = boot_params.hdr.ramdisk_size;
/*
* Set start only if we have an initrd image. We cannot use initrd_start
* because it is not set that early yet.
*/
if (size)
- start = params->hdr.ramdisk_image;
+ start = boot_params.hdr.ramdisk_image;
-# else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
+#else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
size = (unsigned long)boot_params.ext_ramdisk_size << 32;
size |= boot_params.hdr.ramdisk_size;
if (size) {
start = (unsigned long)boot_params.ext_ramdisk_image << 32;
start |= boot_params.hdr.ramdisk_image;
-
start += PAGE_OFFSET;
}
-# endif
+#endif
/*
* Fixup the start address: after reserve_initrd() runs, initrd_start
@@ -270,23 +240,10 @@ struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initr
* initrd_gone is for the hotplug case where we've thrown out initrd
* already.
*/
- if (!use_pa) {
- if (initrd_gone)
- return (struct cpio_data){ NULL, 0, "" };
- if (initrd_start)
- start = initrd_start;
- } else {
- /*
- * The picture with physical addresses is a bit different: we
- * need to get the *physical* address to which the ramdisk was
- * relocated, i.e., relocated_ramdisk (not initrd_start) and
- * since we're running from physical addresses, we need to access
- * relocated_ramdisk through its *physical* address too.
- */
- u64 *rr = (u64 *)__pa_nodebug(&relocated_ramdisk);
- if (*rr)
- start = *rr;
- }
+ if (initrd_gone)
+ return (struct cpio_data){ NULL, 0, "" };
+ if (initrd_start)
+ start = initrd_start;
return find_cpio_data(path, (void *)start, size, NULL);
#else /* !CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD */
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -319,15 +319,8 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(struct
if (!intel_find_matching_signature(p->data, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
return;
- /*
- * Save for early loading. On 32-bit, that needs to be a physical
- * address as the APs are running from physical addresses, before
- * paging has been enabled.
- */
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
- intel_ucode_patch = (struct microcode_intel *)__pa_nodebug(p->data);
- else
- intel_ucode_patch = p->data;
+ /* Save for early loading */
+ intel_ucode_patch = p->data;
}
/*
@@ -420,66 +413,10 @@ static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode
return false;
}
-static void print_ucode_info(int old_rev, int new_rev, unsigned int date)
-{
- pr_info_once("updated early: 0x%x -> 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
- old_rev,
- new_rev,
- date & 0xffff,
- date >> 24,
- (date >> 16) & 0xff);
-}
-
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
-
-static int delay_ucode_info;
-static int current_mc_date;
-static int early_old_rev;
-
-/*
- * Print early updated ucode info after printk works. This is delayed info dump.
- */
-void show_ucode_info_early(void)
-{
- struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
-
- if (delay_ucode_info) {
- intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
- print_ucode_info(early_old_rev, uci.cpu_sig.rev, current_mc_date);
- delay_ucode_info = 0;
- }
-}
-
-/*
- * At this point, we can not call printk() yet. Delay printing microcode info in
- * show_ucode_info_early() until printk() works.
- */
-static void print_ucode(int old_rev, int new_rev, int date)
-{
- int *delay_ucode_info_p;
- int *current_mc_date_p;
- int *early_old_rev_p;
-
- delay_ucode_info_p = (int *)__pa_nodebug(&delay_ucode_info);
- current_mc_date_p = (int *)__pa_nodebug(¤t_mc_date);
- early_old_rev_p = (int *)__pa_nodebug(&early_old_rev);
-
- *delay_ucode_info_p = 1;
- *current_mc_date_p = date;
- *early_old_rev_p = old_rev;
-}
-#else
-
-static inline void print_ucode(int old_rev, int new_rev, int date)
-{
- print_ucode_info(old_rev, new_rev, date);
-}
-#endif
-
-static int apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
+static int apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
{
struct microcode_intel *mc;
- u32 rev, old_rev;
+ u32 rev, old_rev, date;
mc = uci->mc;
if (!mc)
@@ -513,11 +450,9 @@ static int apply_microcode_early(struct
uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev;
- if (early)
- print_ucode(old_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
- else
- print_ucode_info(old_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
-
+ date = mc->hdr.date;
+ pr_info_once("updated early: 0x%x -> 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
+ old_rev, rev, date & 0xffff, date >> 24, (date >> 16) & 0xff);
return 0;
}
@@ -535,7 +470,7 @@ int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_inte
intel_ucode_patch = NULL;
if (!load_builtin_intel_microcode(&cp))
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path, false);
+ cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return 0;
@@ -551,21 +486,11 @@ int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_inte
*/
static struct microcode_intel *__load_ucode_intel(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
{
- static const char *path;
struct cpio_data cp;
- bool use_pa;
-
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32)) {
- path = (const char *)__pa_nodebug(ucode_path);
- use_pa = true;
- } else {
- path = ucode_path;
- use_pa = false;
- }
/* try built-in microcode first */
if (!load_builtin_intel_microcode(&cp))
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(path, use_pa);
+ cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return NULL;
@@ -586,30 +511,21 @@ void __init load_ucode_intel_bsp(void)
uci.mc = patch;
- apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
+ apply_microcode_early(&uci);
}
void load_ucode_intel_ap(void)
{
- struct microcode_intel *patch, **iup;
struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
- iup = (struct microcode_intel **) __pa_nodebug(&intel_ucode_patch);
- else
- iup = &intel_ucode_patch;
-
- if (!*iup) {
- patch = __load_ucode_intel(&uci);
- if (!patch)
+ if (!intel_ucode_patch) {
+ intel_ucode_patch = __load_ucode_intel(&uci);
+ if (!intel_ucode_patch)
return;
-
- *iup = patch;
}
- uci.mc = *iup;
-
- apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
+ uci.mc = intel_ucode_patch;
+ apply_microcode_early(&uci);
}
static struct microcode_intel *find_patch(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
@@ -647,7 +563,7 @@ void reload_ucode_intel(void)
uci.mc = p;
- apply_microcode_early(&uci, false);
+ apply_microcode_early(&uci);
}
static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num, struct cpu_signature *csig)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ struct microcode_ops {
};
extern struct ucode_cpu_info ucode_cpu_info[];
-struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path, bool use_pa);
+struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path);
#define MAX_UCODE_COUNT 128
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/head32.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head32.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include <asm/apic.h>
#include <asm/io_apic.h>
#include <asm/bios_ebda.h>
+#include <asm/microcode.h>
#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
#include <asm/bootparam_utils.h>
@@ -34,6 +35,8 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __init __noret
/* Make sure IDT is set up before any exception happens */
idt_setup_early_handler();
+ load_ucode_bsp();
+
cr4_init_shadow();
sanitize_boot_params(&boot_params);
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S
@@ -118,11 +118,6 @@ SYM_CODE_START(startup_32)
movl %eax, pa(olpc_ofw_pgd)
#endif
-#ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE
- /* Early load ucode on BSP. */
- call load_ucode_bsp
-#endif
-
/* Create early pagetables. */
call mk_early_pgtbl_32
@@ -157,11 +152,6 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(startup_32_smp)
movl %eax,%ss
leal -__PAGE_OFFSET(%ecx),%esp
-#ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE
- /* Early load ucode on AP. */
- call load_ucode_ap
-#endif
-
.Ldefault_entry:
movl $(CR0_STATE & ~X86_CR0_PG),%eax
movl %eax,%cr0
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -258,12 +258,9 @@ static void notrace start_secondary(void
cpu_init_exception_handling();
/*
- * 32-bit systems load the microcode from the ASM startup code for
- * historical reasons.
- *
- * On 64-bit systems load it before reaching the AP alive
- * synchronization point below so it is not part of the full per
- * CPU serialized bringup part when "parallel" bringup is enabled.
+ * Load the microcode before reaching the AP alive synchronization
+ * point below so it is not part of the full per CPU serialized
+ * bringup part when "parallel" bringup is enabled.
*
* That's even safe when hyperthreading is enabled in the CPU as
* the core code starts the primary threads first and leaves the
@@ -276,8 +273,7 @@ static void notrace start_secondary(void
* CPUID, MSRs etc. must be strictly serialized to maintain
* software state correctness.
*/
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64))
- load_ucode_ap();
+ load_ucode_ap();
/*
* Synchronization point with the hotplug core. Sets this CPUs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 02/30] x86/boot/32: Disable stackprotector and tracing for mk_early_pgtbl_32()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-18 17:12 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 03/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rip out mixed stepping support for Intel CPUs Thomas Gleixner
` (29 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
Stackprotector cannot work before paging is enabled. The read from the per
CPU variable __stack_chk_guard is always accessing the virtual address
either directly on UP or via FS on SMP. In physical address mode this
results in an access to memory above 3GB.
So this works by chance as the hardware returns the same value when there
is no RAM at this physical address. When there is RAM populated above 3G
then the read is by chance the same as nothing changes that memory during
the very early boot stage.
Stop relying on pure luck and disable the stack protector for the only C
function which is called during early boot before paging is enabled.
Remove function tracing from the whole source file as there is no way to
trace this at all, but in case of CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE=n
mk_early_pgtbl_32() would access global function tracer variables in
physcial address mode which again might work by chance.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/Makefile | 1 +
arch/x86/kernel/head32.c | 3 ++-
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ CFLAGS_REMOVE_kvmclock.o = -pg
CFLAGS_REMOVE_ftrace.o = -pg
CFLAGS_REMOVE_early_printk.o = -pg
CFLAGS_REMOVE_head64.o = -pg
+CFLAGS_REMOVE_head32.o = -pg
CFLAGS_REMOVE_sev.o = -pg
CFLAGS_REMOVE_rethook.o = -pg
endif
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/head32.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head32.c
@@ -73,7 +73,8 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __init __noret
* always zero at this stage.
*/
void __init mk_early_pgtbl_32(void);
-void __init mk_early_pgtbl_32(void)
+
+void __init __no_stack_protector mk_early_pgtbl_32(void)
{
#ifdef __pa
#undef __pa
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 02/30] x86/boot/32: Disable stackprotector and tracing for mk_early_pgtbl_32()
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 02/30] x86/boot/32: Disable stackprotector and tracing for mk_early_pgtbl_32() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-18 17:12 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-18 17:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:46AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Remove function tracing from the whole source file as there is no way to
> trace this at all, but in case of CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE=n
> mk_early_pgtbl_32() would access global function tracer variables in
> physcial address mode which again might work by chance.
Unknown word [physcial] in commit message.
Suggestions: ['physical'
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 03/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rip out mixed stepping support for Intel CPUs
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 01/30] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 02/30] x86/boot/32: Disable stackprotector and tracing for mk_early_pgtbl_32() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-25 15:19 ` Qiuxu Zhuo
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 04/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify scan_microcode() Thomas Gleixner
` (28 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML
Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov, Ashok Raj
From: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Mixed steppings aren't supported on Intel CPUs. Only one patch is required
for the entire system. The caching of micro code blobs which match the
family and model is therefore pointless and in fact it is disfunctional as
CPU hotplug updates use only a single microcode blob, i.e. the one where
*intel_ucode_patch points to.
Remove the microcode cache and make it an AMD local feature.
[ tglx: Save only at the end. Otherwise random microcode ends up in the
pointer for early loading ]
Originally-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: Fix the bogus condition - Borislav
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 10 ++
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 2
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 133 +++++--------------------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 10 --
4 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 120 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -37,6 +37,16 @@
#include "internal.h"
+struct ucode_patch {
+ struct list_head plist;
+ void *data;
+ unsigned int size;
+ u32 patch_id;
+ u16 equiv_cpu;
+};
+
+static LIST_HEAD(microcode_cache);
+
#define UCODE_MAGIC 0x00414d44
#define UCODE_EQUIV_CPU_TABLE_TYPE 0x00000000
#define UCODE_UCODE_TYPE 0x00000001
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -46,8 +46,6 @@ static bool dis_ucode_ldr = true;
bool initrd_gone;
-LIST_HEAD(microcode_cache);
-
/*
* Synchronization.
*
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -33,10 +33,10 @@
static const char ucode_path[] = "kernel/x86/microcode/GenuineIntel.bin";
/* Current microcode patch used in early patching on the APs. */
-static struct microcode_intel *intel_ucode_patch;
+static struct microcode_intel *intel_ucode_patch __read_mostly;
/* last level cache size per core */
-static int llc_size_per_core;
+static int llc_size_per_core __ro_after_init;
/* microcode format is extended from prescott processors */
struct extended_signature {
@@ -253,74 +253,19 @@ static int has_newer_microcode(void *mc,
return intel_find_matching_signature(mc, csig, cpf);
}
-static struct ucode_patch *memdup_patch(void *data, unsigned int size)
+static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size)
{
- struct ucode_patch *p;
+ struct microcode_header_intel *p;
- p = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ucode_patch), GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!p)
- return NULL;
-
- p->data = kmemdup(data, size, GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!p->data) {
- kfree(p);
- return NULL;
- }
-
- return p;
-}
-
-static void save_microcode_patch(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, void *data, unsigned int size)
-{
- struct microcode_header_intel *mc_hdr, *mc_saved_hdr;
- struct ucode_patch *iter, *tmp, *p = NULL;
- bool prev_found = false;
- unsigned int sig, pf;
-
- mc_hdr = (struct microcode_header_intel *)data;
-
- list_for_each_entry_safe(iter, tmp, µcode_cache, plist) {
- mc_saved_hdr = (struct microcode_header_intel *)iter->data;
- sig = mc_saved_hdr->sig;
- pf = mc_saved_hdr->pf;
-
- if (intel_find_matching_signature(data, sig, pf)) {
- prev_found = true;
-
- if (mc_hdr->rev <= mc_saved_hdr->rev)
- continue;
-
- p = memdup_patch(data, size);
- if (!p)
- pr_err("Error allocating buffer %p\n", data);
- else {
- list_replace(&iter->plist, &p->plist);
- kfree(iter->data);
- kfree(iter);
- }
- }
- }
-
- /*
- * There weren't any previous patches found in the list cache; save the
- * newly found.
- */
- if (!prev_found) {
- p = memdup_patch(data, size);
- if (!p)
- pr_err("Error allocating buffer for %p\n", data);
- else
- list_add_tail(&p->plist, µcode_cache);
- }
+ kfree(intel_ucode_patch);
+ intel_ucode_patch = NULL;
+ p = kmemdup(data, size, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!p)
return;
- if (!intel_find_matching_signature(p->data, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
- return;
-
/* Save for early loading */
- intel_ucode_patch = p->data;
+ intel_ucode_patch = (struct microcode_intel *)p;
}
/*
@@ -332,6 +277,7 @@ scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
{
struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header;
struct microcode_intel *patch = NULL;
+ u32 cur_rev = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
unsigned int mc_size;
while (size) {
@@ -341,8 +287,7 @@ scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
mc_header = (struct microcode_header_intel *)data;
mc_size = get_totalsize(mc_header);
- if (!mc_size ||
- mc_size > size ||
+ if (!mc_size || mc_size > size ||
intel_microcode_sanity_check(data, false, MC_HEADER_TYPE_MICROCODE) < 0)
break;
@@ -354,31 +299,16 @@ scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
continue;
}
- if (save) {
- save_microcode_patch(uci, data, mc_size);
+ /* BSP scan: Check whether there is newer microcode */
+ if (!save && cur_rev >= mc_header->rev)
goto next;
- }
-
- if (!patch) {
- if (!has_newer_microcode(data,
- uci->cpu_sig.sig,
- uci->cpu_sig.pf,
- uci->cpu_sig.rev))
- goto next;
-
- } else {
- struct microcode_header_intel *phdr = &patch->hdr;
-
- if (!has_newer_microcode(data,
- phdr->sig,
- phdr->pf,
- phdr->rev))
- goto next;
- }
+ /* Save scan: Check whether there is newer or matching microcode */
+ if (save && cur_rev != mc_header->rev)
+ goto next;
- /* We have a newer patch, save it. */
patch = data;
+ cur_rev = mc_header->rev;
next:
data += mc_size;
@@ -387,6 +317,9 @@ scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
if (size)
return NULL;
+ if (save && patch)
+ save_microcode_patch(patch, mc_size);
+
return patch;
}
@@ -528,26 +461,10 @@ void load_ucode_intel_ap(void)
apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
}
-static struct microcode_intel *find_patch(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
+/* Accessor for microcode pointer */
+static struct microcode_intel *ucode_get_patch(void)
{
- struct microcode_header_intel *phdr;
- struct ucode_patch *iter, *tmp;
-
- list_for_each_entry_safe(iter, tmp, µcode_cache, plist) {
-
- phdr = (struct microcode_header_intel *)iter->data;
-
- if (phdr->rev <= uci->cpu_sig.rev)
- continue;
-
- if (!intel_find_matching_signature(phdr,
- uci->cpu_sig.sig,
- uci->cpu_sig.pf))
- continue;
-
- return iter->data;
- }
- return NULL;
+ return intel_ucode_patch;
}
void reload_ucode_intel(void)
@@ -557,7 +474,7 @@ void reload_ucode_intel(void)
intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
- p = find_patch(&uci);
+ p = ucode_get_patch();
if (!p)
return;
@@ -601,7 +518,7 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
return UCODE_ERROR;
/* Look for a newer patch in our cache: */
- mc = find_patch(uci);
+ mc = ucode_get_patch();
if (!mc) {
mc = uci->mc;
if (!mc)
@@ -730,7 +647,7 @@ static enum ucode_state generic_load_mic
uci->mc = (struct microcode_intel *)new_mc;
/* Save for CPU hotplug */
- save_microcode_patch(uci, new_mc, new_mc_size);
+ save_microcode_patch(new_mc, new_mc_size);
pr_debug("CPU%d found a matching microcode update with version 0x%x (current=0x%x)\n",
cpu, new_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev);
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -8,16 +8,6 @@
#include <asm/cpu.h>
#include <asm/microcode.h>
-struct ucode_patch {
- struct list_head plist;
- void *data; /* Intel uses only this one */
- unsigned int size;
- u32 patch_id;
- u16 equiv_cpu;
-};
-
-extern struct list_head microcode_cache;
-
struct device;
enum ucode_state {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 04/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify scan_microcode()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 03/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rip out mixed stepping support for Intel CPUs Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-19 12:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 05/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify and rename generic_load_microcode() Thomas Gleixner
` (27 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
Make it readable and comprehensible.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 30 ++++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -265,25 +265,19 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(void *d
return;
/* Save for early loading */
- intel_ucode_patch = (struct microcode_intel *)p;
+ intel_ucode_patch = (struct microcode_intel *)p;
}
-/*
- * Get microcode matching with BSP's model. Only CPUs with the same model as
- * BSP can stay in the platform.
- */
-static struct microcode_intel *
-scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size, struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool save)
+/* Scan CPIO for microcode matching the boot CPUs family, model, stepping */
+static struct microcode_intel *scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
+ struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool save)
{
struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header;
struct microcode_intel *patch = NULL;
u32 cur_rev = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
unsigned int mc_size;
- while (size) {
- if (size < sizeof(struct microcode_header_intel))
- break;
-
+ for (; size >= sizeof(struct microcode_header_intel); size -= mc_size, data += mc_size) {
mc_header = (struct microcode_header_intel *)data;
mc_size = get_totalsize(mc_header);
@@ -291,27 +285,19 @@ scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
intel_microcode_sanity_check(data, false, MC_HEADER_TYPE_MICROCODE) < 0)
break;
- size -= mc_size;
-
- if (!intel_find_matching_signature(data, uci->cpu_sig.sig,
- uci->cpu_sig.pf)) {
- data += mc_size;
+ if (!intel_find_matching_signature(data, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
continue;
- }
/* BSP scan: Check whether there is newer microcode */
if (!save && cur_rev >= mc_header->rev)
- goto next;
+ continue;
/* Save scan: Check whether there is newer or matching microcode */
if (save && cur_rev != mc_header->rev)
- goto next;
+ continue;
patch = data;
cur_rev = mc_header->rev;
-
-next:
- data += mc_size;
}
if (size)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 04/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify scan_microcode()
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 04/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify scan_microcode() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-19 12:52 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-19 12:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:49AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Make it readable and comprehensible.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 30 ++++++++----------------------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -265,25 +265,19 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(void *d
> return;
>
> /* Save for early loading */
> - intel_ucode_patch = (struct microcode_intel *)p;
> + intel_ucode_patch = (struct microcode_intel *)p;
This got committed by mistake.
> -/*
> - * Get microcode matching with BSP's model. Only CPUs with the same model as
> - * BSP can stay in the platform.
> - */
> -static struct microcode_intel *
> -scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size, struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool save)
> +/* Scan CPIO for microcode matching the boot CPUs family, model, stepping */
"... the boot CPU's... " or simply the "BSP's".
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 05/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify and rename generic_load_microcode()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 04/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify scan_microcode() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 06/30] x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code further Thomas Gleixner
` (26 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
so it becomes less obfuscated and rename it because there is nothing
generic about it.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V3: Rename to parse_microcode_blobs() - Borislav
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 47 ++++++++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -240,19 +240,6 @@ int intel_microcode_sanity_check(void *m
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_microcode_sanity_check);
-/*
- * Returns 1 if update has been found, 0 otherwise.
- */
-static int has_newer_microcode(void *mc, unsigned int csig, int cpf, int new_rev)
-{
- struct microcode_header_intel *mc_hdr = mc;
-
- if (mc_hdr->rev <= new_rev)
- return 0;
-
- return intel_find_matching_signature(mc, csig, cpf);
-}
-
static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size)
{
struct microcode_header_intel *p;
@@ -561,14 +548,12 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
return ret;
}
-static enum ucode_state generic_load_microcode(int cpu, struct iov_iter *iter)
+static enum ucode_state parse_microcode_blobs(int cpu, struct iov_iter *iter)
{
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
unsigned int curr_mc_size = 0, new_mc_size = 0;
- enum ucode_state ret = UCODE_OK;
- int new_rev = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
+ int cur_rev = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
u8 *new_mc = NULL, *mc = NULL;
- unsigned int csig, cpf;
while (iov_iter_count(iter)) {
struct microcode_header_intel mc_header;
@@ -585,6 +570,7 @@ static enum ucode_state generic_load_mic
pr_err("error! Bad data in microcode data file (totalsize too small)\n");
break;
}
+
data_size = mc_size - sizeof(mc_header);
if (data_size > iov_iter_count(iter)) {
pr_err("error! Bad data in microcode data file (truncated file?)\n");
@@ -607,16 +593,17 @@ static enum ucode_state generic_load_mic
break;
}
- csig = uci->cpu_sig.sig;
- cpf = uci->cpu_sig.pf;
- if (has_newer_microcode(mc, csig, cpf, new_rev)) {
- vfree(new_mc);
- new_rev = mc_header.rev;
- new_mc = mc;
- new_mc_size = mc_size;
- mc = NULL; /* trigger new vmalloc */
- ret = UCODE_NEW;
- }
+ if (cur_rev >= mc_header.rev)
+ continue;
+
+ if (!intel_find_matching_signature(mc, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
+ continue;
+
+ vfree(new_mc);
+ cur_rev = mc_header.rev;
+ new_mc = mc;
+ new_mc_size = mc_size;
+ mc = NULL;
}
vfree(mc);
@@ -636,9 +623,9 @@ static enum ucode_state generic_load_mic
save_microcode_patch(new_mc, new_mc_size);
pr_debug("CPU%d found a matching microcode update with version 0x%x (current=0x%x)\n",
- cpu, new_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev);
+ cpu, cur_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev);
- return ret;
+ return UCODE_NEW;
}
static bool is_blacklisted(unsigned int cpu)
@@ -687,7 +674,7 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcod
kvec.iov_base = (void *)firmware->data;
kvec.iov_len = firmware->size;
iov_iter_kvec(&iter, ITER_SOURCE, &kvec, 1, firmware->size);
- ret = generic_load_microcode(cpu, &iter);
+ ret = parse_microcode_blobs(cpu, &iter);
release_firmware(firmware);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 06/30] x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code further
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 05/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify and rename generic_load_microcode() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-19 14:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 07/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loading Thomas Gleixner
` (25 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Sanitize the microcode scan loop, fixup printks and move the initrd loading
function next to the place where it is used and mark it __init.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: Fix changelog - Nikolay
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 76 ++++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ static const char ucode_path[] = "kernel
static struct microcode_intel *intel_ucode_patch __read_mostly;
/* last level cache size per core */
-static int llc_size_per_core __ro_after_init;
+static unsigned int llc_size_per_core __ro_after_init;
/* microcode format is extended from prescott processors */
struct extended_signature {
@@ -296,29 +296,6 @@ static struct microcode_intel *scan_micr
return patch;
}
-static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode(struct cpio_data *cp)
-{
- unsigned int eax = 1, ebx, ecx = 0, edx;
- struct firmware fw;
- char name[30];
-
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
- return false;
-
- native_cpuid(&eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
-
- sprintf(name, "intel-ucode/%02x-%02x-%02x",
- x86_family(eax), x86_model(eax), x86_stepping(eax));
-
- if (firmware_request_builtin(&fw, name)) {
- cp->size = fw.size;
- cp->data = (void *)fw.data;
- return true;
- }
-
- return false;
-}
-
static int apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
{
struct microcode_intel *mc;
@@ -362,6 +339,28 @@ static int apply_microcode_early(struct
return 0;
}
+static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode(struct cpio_data *cp)
+{
+ unsigned int eax = 1, ebx, ecx = 0, edx;
+ struct firmware fw;
+ char name[30];
+
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
+ return false;
+
+ native_cpuid(&eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
+
+ sprintf(name, "intel-ucode/%02x-%02x-%02x",
+ x86_family(eax), x86_model(eax), x86_stepping(eax));
+
+ if (firmware_request_builtin(&fw, name)) {
+ cp->size = fw.size;
+ cp->data = (void *)fw.data;
+ return true;
+ }
+ return false;
+}
+
int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_intel(void)
{
struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
@@ -434,25 +433,16 @@ void load_ucode_intel_ap(void)
apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
}
-/* Accessor for microcode pointer */
-static struct microcode_intel *ucode_get_patch(void)
-{
- return intel_ucode_patch;
-}
-
void reload_ucode_intel(void)
{
- struct microcode_intel *p;
struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
- p = ucode_get_patch();
- if (!p)
+ uci.mc = intel_ucode_patch;
+ if (!uci.mc)
return;
- uci.mc = p;
-
apply_microcode_early(&uci, false);
}
@@ -490,8 +480,7 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
if (WARN_ON(raw_smp_processor_id() != cpu))
return UCODE_ERROR;
- /* Look for a newer patch in our cache: */
- mc = ucode_get_patch();
+ mc = intel_ucode_patch;
if (!mc) {
mc = uci->mc;
if (!mc)
@@ -682,18 +671,17 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcod
}
static struct microcode_ops microcode_intel_ops = {
- .request_microcode_fw = request_microcode_fw,
- .collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info,
- .apply_microcode = apply_microcode_intel,
+ .request_microcode_fw = request_microcode_fw,
+ .collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info,
+ .apply_microcode = apply_microcode_intel,
};
-static int __init calc_llc_size_per_core(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
+static __init void calc_llc_size_per_core(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
{
u64 llc_size = c->x86_cache_size * 1024ULL;
do_div(llc_size, c->x86_max_cores);
-
- return (int)llc_size;
+ llc_size_per_core = (unsigned int)llc_size;
}
struct microcode_ops * __init init_intel_microcode(void)
@@ -706,7 +694,7 @@ struct microcode_ops * __init init_intel
return NULL;
}
- llc_size_per_core = calc_llc_size_per_core(c);
+ calc_llc_size_per_core(c);
return µcode_intel_ops;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 06/30] x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code further
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 06/30] x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code further Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-19 14:13 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-19 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:52AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> Sanitize the microcode scan loop, fixup printks and move the initrd loading
The "builtin". Yeah, we support builtin microcode loading too. ;-\
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 07/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loading
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 06/30] x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code further Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-19 14:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 08/30] x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-load Thomas Gleixner
` (24 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
The early loading code is overly complicated:
- It scans the builtin/initrd for microcode not only on the BSP, but also
on all APs during early boot and then later in the boot process it
scans again to duplicate and save the microcode before initrd goes away.
That's a pointless exercise because this can be simply done before
bringing up the APs when the memory allocator is up and running.
- Saving the microcode from within the scan loop is completely
non-obvious and a left over of the microcode cache.
This can be done at the call site now which makes it obvious.
Rework the code so that only the BSP scans the builtin/initrd microcode
once during early boot and save it away in an early initcall for later
use.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 4
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 148 +++++++++++++------------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 2
3 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 90 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -186,10 +186,6 @@ static int __init save_microcode_in_init
int ret = -EINVAL;
switch (c->x86_vendor) {
- case X86_VENDOR_INTEL:
- if (c->x86 >= 6)
- ret = save_microcode_in_initrd_intel();
- break;
case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
if (c->x86 >= 0x10)
ret = save_microcode_in_initrd_amd(cpuid_eax(1));
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
static const char ucode_path[] = "kernel/x86/microcode/GenuineIntel.bin";
/* Current microcode patch used in early patching on the APs. */
-static struct microcode_intel *intel_ucode_patch __read_mostly;
+static struct microcode_intel *ucode_patch_va __read_mostly;
/* last level cache size per core */
static unsigned int llc_size_per_core __ro_after_init;
@@ -240,24 +240,29 @@ int intel_microcode_sanity_check(void *m
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_microcode_sanity_check);
-static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size)
+static void update_ucode_pointer(struct microcode_intel *mc)
{
- struct microcode_header_intel *p;
+ kfree(ucode_patch_va);
- kfree(intel_ucode_patch);
- intel_ucode_patch = NULL;
+ /*
+ * Save the virtual address for early loading and for eventual free
+ * on late loading.
+ */
+ ucode_patch_va = mc;
+}
- p = kmemdup(data, size, GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!p)
- return;
+static void save_microcode_patch(struct microcode_intel *patch)
+{
+ struct microcode_intel *mc;
- /* Save for early loading */
- intel_ucode_patch = (struct microcode_intel *)p;
+ mc = kmemdup(patch, get_totalsize(&patch->hdr), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (mc)
+ update_ucode_pointer(mc);
}
/* Scan CPIO for microcode matching the boot CPUs family, model, stepping */
-static struct microcode_intel *scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
- struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool save)
+static __init struct microcode_intel *scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
+ struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
{
struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header;
struct microcode_intel *patch = NULL;
@@ -275,35 +280,25 @@ static struct microcode_intel *scan_micr
if (!intel_find_matching_signature(data, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
continue;
- /* BSP scan: Check whether there is newer microcode */
- if (!save && cur_rev >= mc_header->rev)
- continue;
-
- /* Save scan: Check whether there is newer or matching microcode */
- if (save && cur_rev != mc_header->rev)
+ /* Check whether there is newer microcode */
+ if (cur_rev >= mc_header->rev)
continue;
patch = data;
cur_rev = mc_header->rev;
}
- if (size)
- return NULL;
-
- if (save && patch)
- save_microcode_patch(patch, mc_size);
-
- return patch;
+ return size ? NULL : patch;
}
-static int apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
+static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
{
struct microcode_intel *mc;
u32 rev, old_rev, date;
mc = uci->mc;
if (!mc)
- return 0;
+ return UCODE_NFOUND;
/*
* Save us the MSR write below - which is a particular expensive
@@ -329,17 +324,17 @@ static int apply_microcode_early(struct
rev = intel_get_microcode_revision();
if (rev != mc->hdr.rev)
- return -1;
+ return UCODE_ERROR;
uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev;
date = mc->hdr.date;
pr_info_once("updated early: 0x%x -> 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
old_rev, rev, date & 0xffff, date >> 24, (date >> 16) & 0xff);
- return 0;
+ return UCODE_UPDATED;
}
-static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode(struct cpio_data *cp)
+static __init bool load_builtin_intel_microcode(struct cpio_data *cp)
{
unsigned int eax = 1, ebx, ecx = 0, edx;
struct firmware fw;
@@ -361,89 +356,75 @@ static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode
return false;
}
-int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_intel(void)
+static __init struct microcode_intel *get_ucode_from_cpio(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
{
- struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
struct cpio_data cp;
- /*
- * initrd is going away, clear patch ptr. We will scan the microcode one
- * last time before jettisoning and save a patch, if found. Then we will
- * update that pointer too, with a stable patch address to use when
- * resuming the cores.
- */
- intel_ucode_patch = NULL;
-
if (!load_builtin_intel_microcode(&cp))
cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
- return 0;
+ return NULL;
- intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
+ intel_cpu_collect_info(uci);
- scan_microcode(cp.data, cp.size, &uci, true);
- return 0;
+ return scan_microcode(cp.data, cp.size, uci);
}
+static struct microcode_intel *ucode_early_pa __initdata;
+
/*
- * @res_patch, output: a pointer to the patch we found.
+ * Invoked from an early init call to save the microcode blob which was
+ * selected during early boot when mm was not usable. The microcode must be
+ * saved because initrd is going away. It's an early init call so the APs
+ * just can use the pointer and do not have to scan initrd/builtin firmware
+ * again.
*/
-static struct microcode_intel *__load_ucode_intel(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
+static int __init save_microcode_from_cpio(void)
{
- struct cpio_data cp;
-
- /* try built-in microcode first */
- if (!load_builtin_intel_microcode(&cp))
- cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
-
- if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
- return NULL;
+ struct microcode_intel *mc;
- intel_cpu_collect_info(uci);
+ if (!ucode_early_pa)
+ return 0;
- return scan_microcode(cp.data, cp.size, uci, false);
+ mc = __va((void *)ucode_early_pa);
+ save_microcode_patch(mc);
+ return 0;
}
+early_initcall(save_microcode_from_cpio);
+/* Load microcode on BSP from CPIO */
void __init load_ucode_intel_bsp(void)
{
- struct microcode_intel *patch;
struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
- patch = __load_ucode_intel(&uci);
- if (!patch)
+ uci.mc = get_ucode_from_cpio(&uci);
+ if (!uci.mc)
return;
- uci.mc = patch;
+ if (apply_microcode_early(&uci, true) != UCODE_UPDATED)
+ return;
- apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
+ /* Store the physical address as KASLR happens after this. */
+ ucode_early_pa = (struct microcode_intel *)__pa_nodebug(uci.mc);
}
void load_ucode_intel_ap(void)
{
struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
- if (!intel_ucode_patch) {
- intel_ucode_patch = __load_ucode_intel(&uci);
- if (!intel_ucode_patch)
- return;
- }
-
- uci.mc = intel_ucode_patch;
- apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
+ uci.mc = ucode_patch_va;
+ if (uci.mc)
+ apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
}
+/* Reload microcode on resume */
void reload_ucode_intel(void)
{
- struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
-
- intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
+ struct ucode_cpu_info uci = { .mc = ucode_patch_va, };
- uci.mc = intel_ucode_patch;
- if (!uci.mc)
- return;
-
- apply_microcode_early(&uci, false);
+ if (uci.mc)
+ apply_microcode_early(&uci, false);
}
static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num, struct cpu_signature *csig)
@@ -480,7 +461,7 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
if (WARN_ON(raw_smp_processor_id() != cpu))
return UCODE_ERROR;
- mc = intel_ucode_patch;
+ mc = ucode_patch_va;
if (!mc) {
mc = uci->mc;
if (!mc)
@@ -540,8 +521,8 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
static enum ucode_state parse_microcode_blobs(int cpu, struct iov_iter *iter)
{
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
- unsigned int curr_mc_size = 0, new_mc_size = 0;
int cur_rev = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
+ unsigned int curr_mc_size = 0;
u8 *new_mc = NULL, *mc = NULL;
while (iov_iter_count(iter)) {
@@ -591,7 +572,6 @@ static enum ucode_state parse_microcode_
vfree(new_mc);
cur_rev = mc_header.rev;
new_mc = mc;
- new_mc_size = mc_size;
mc = NULL;
}
@@ -605,11 +585,11 @@ static enum ucode_state parse_microcode_
if (!new_mc)
return UCODE_NFOUND;
- vfree(uci->mc);
- uci->mc = (struct microcode_intel *)new_mc;
-
/* Save for CPU hotplug */
- save_microcode_patch(new_mc, new_mc_size);
+ save_microcode_patch((struct microcode_intel *)new_mc);
+ uci->mc = ucode_patch_va;
+
+ vfree(new_mc);
pr_debug("CPU%d found a matching microcode update with version 0x%x (current=0x%x)\n",
cpu, cur_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev);
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -107,13 +107,11 @@ static inline void exit_amd_microcode(vo
#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL
void load_ucode_intel_bsp(void);
void load_ucode_intel_ap(void);
-int save_microcode_in_initrd_intel(void);
void reload_ucode_intel(void);
struct microcode_ops *init_intel_microcode(void);
#else /* CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL */
static inline void load_ucode_intel_bsp(void) { }
static inline void load_ucode_intel_ap(void) { }
-static inline int save_microcode_in_initrd_intel(void) { return -EINVAL; }
static inline void reload_ucode_intel(void) { }
static inline struct microcode_ops *init_intel_microcode(void) { return NULL; }
#endif /* !CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL */
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 07/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loading
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 07/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loading Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-19 14:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-19 14:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-19 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:54AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> @@ -361,89 +356,75 @@ static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode
> return false;
> }
>
> -int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_intel(void)
> +static __init struct microcode_intel *get_ucode_from_cpio(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
This is not only cpio but the builtin crap too. Just call it
load_microcode_blobs() or so.
...
> -static struct microcode_intel *__load_ucode_intel(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
> +static int __init save_microcode_from_cpio(void)
> {
> - struct cpio_data cp;
> -
> - /* try built-in microcode first */
> - if (!load_builtin_intel_microcode(&cp))
> - cp = find_microcode_in_initrd(ucode_path);
> -
> - if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
> - return NULL;
> + struct microcode_intel *mc;
>
> - intel_cpu_collect_info(uci);
> + if (!ucode_early_pa)
> + return 0;
>
> - return scan_microcode(cp.data, cp.size, uci, false);
> + mc = __va((void *)ucode_early_pa);
> + save_microcode_patch(mc);
> + return 0;
> }
> +early_initcall(save_microcode_from_cpio);
>
> +/* Load microcode on BSP from CPIO */
Yeah, no need to say "from CPIO" everywhere. We load it from somewhere,
it can be cpio but it can be builtin too.
But I can fix up too when applying.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 07/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loading
2023-09-19 14:32 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-09-19 14:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-19 17:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-19 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 19 2023 at 16:32, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:54AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> +/* Load microcode on BSP from CPIO */
>
> Yeah, no need to say "from CPIO" everywhere. We load it from somewhere,
> it can be cpio but it can be builtin too.
Makes sense.
> But I can fix up too when applying.
Thanks a lot!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch V3 07/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loading
2023-09-19 14:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-19 17:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-19 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 19 2023 at 16:57, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19 2023 at 16:32, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:54AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> +/* Load microcode on BSP from CPIO */
>>
>> Yeah, no need to say "from CPIO" everywhere. We load it from somewhere,
>> it can be cpio but it can be builtin too.
>
> Makes sense.
>
>> But I can fix up too when applying.
>
> Thanks a lot!
Let me fix that up and repost as the removal of the early argument
in patch 1/N causes a metric ton of conflicts all over the series.
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 08/30] x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-load
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 07/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loading Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-20 14:39 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-25 15:30 ` Subject: " Qiuxu Zhuo
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 09/30] x86/microcode/intel: Switch to kvmalloc() Thomas Gleixner
` (23 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 2 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
There are situations where the late microcode is loaded into memory, but is
not applied:
1) The rendevouz fails
2) The microcode is rejected by the CPUs
If any of this happens then the pointer which was updated at firmware load
time is stale and subsequent CPU hotplug operations either fail to update
or create inconsistent microcode state.
Save the loaded microcode in a separate pointer from with the late load is
attempted and when successful, update the hotplug pointer accordingly via a
new micrcode_ops callback.
Remove the pointless fallback in the loader to a microcode pointer which is
never populated.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 4 ++++
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 30 +++++++++++++++---------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -400,6 +400,10 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
store_cpu_caps(&prev_info);
ret = stop_machine_cpuslocked(__reload_late, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
+
+ if (microcode_ops->finalize_late_load)
+ microcode_ops->finalize_late_load(ret);
+
if (!ret) {
pr_info("Reload succeeded, microcode revision: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n",
old, boot_cpu_data.microcode);
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ static const char ucode_path[] = "kernel
/* Current microcode patch used in early patching on the APs. */
static struct microcode_intel *ucode_patch_va __read_mostly;
+static struct microcode_intel *ucode_patch_late __read_mostly;
/* last level cache size per core */
static unsigned int llc_size_per_core __ro_after_init;
@@ -461,12 +462,9 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
if (WARN_ON(raw_smp_processor_id() != cpu))
return UCODE_ERROR;
- mc = ucode_patch_va;
- if (!mc) {
- mc = uci->mc;
- if (!mc)
- return UCODE_NFOUND;
- }
+ mc = ucode_patch_late;
+ if (!mc)
+ return UCODE_NFOUND;
/*
* Save us the MSR write below - which is a particular expensive
@@ -585,15 +583,7 @@ static enum ucode_state parse_microcode_
if (!new_mc)
return UCODE_NFOUND;
- /* Save for CPU hotplug */
- save_microcode_patch((struct microcode_intel *)new_mc);
- uci->mc = ucode_patch_va;
-
- vfree(new_mc);
-
- pr_debug("CPU%d found a matching microcode update with version 0x%x (current=0x%x)\n",
- cpu, cur_rev, uci->cpu_sig.rev);
-
+ ucode_patch_late = (struct microcode_intel *)new_mc;
return UCODE_NEW;
}
@@ -650,10 +640,20 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcod
return ret;
}
+static void finalize_late_load(int result)
+{
+ if (!result)
+ save_microcode_patch(ucode_patch_late);
+
+ vfree(ucode_patch_late);
+ ucode_patch_late = NULL;
+}
+
static struct microcode_ops microcode_intel_ops = {
.request_microcode_fw = request_microcode_fw,
.collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info,
.apply_microcode = apply_microcode_intel,
+ .finalize_late_load = finalize_late_load,
};
static __init void calc_llc_size_per_core(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ struct microcode_ops {
*/
enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
+ void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
};
extern struct ucode_cpu_info ucode_cpu_info[];
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 08/30] x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-load
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 08/30] x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-load Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-20 14:39 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-25 15:30 ` Subject: " Qiuxu Zhuo
1 sibling, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-20 14:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:56AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> There are situations where the late microcode is loaded into memory, but is
> not applied:
>
> 1) The rendevouz fails
> 2) The microcode is rejected by the CPUs
>
> If any of this happens then the pointer which was updated at firmware load
> time is stale and subsequent CPU hotplug operations either fail to update
> or create inconsistent microcode state.
>
> Save the loaded microcode in a separate pointer from with the late load is
s/from with/before/
> attempted and when successful, update the hotplug pointer accordingly via a
> new micrcode_ops callback.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: Subject: [patch V3 08/30] x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-load
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 08/30] x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-load Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-20 14:39 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-09-25 15:30 ` Qiuxu Zhuo
1 sibling, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Qiuxu Zhuo @ 2023-09-25 15:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tglx; +Cc: arjan, bp, chang.seok.bae, linux-kernel, nik.borisov, x86,
qiuxu.zhuo
> ...
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> There are situations where the late microcode is loaded into memory, but is
> not applied:
>
> 1) The rendevouz fails
s/rendevouz/rendezvous/
> 2) The microcode is rejected by the CPUs
>
> If any of this happens then the pointer which was updated at firmware load
> time is stale and subsequent CPU hotplug operations either fail to update
> or create inconsistent microcode state.
>
> Save the loaded microcode in a separate pointer from with the late load is
> attempted and when successful, update the hotplug pointer accordingly via a
> new micrcode_ops callback.
s/micrcode_ops/microcode_ops
>
> Remove the pointless fallback in the loader to a microcode pointer which is
> never populated.
> ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 09/30] x86/microcode/intel: Switch to kvmalloc()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 08/30] x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-load Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-25 15:43 ` Subject: " Qiuxu Zhuo
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 10/30] x86/microcode/intel: Unify microcode apply() functions Thomas Gleixner
` (22 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Microcode blobs are getting larger and might soon reach the kmalloc()
limit. Switch over kvmalloc().
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -14,7 +14,6 @@
#include <linux/earlycpio.h>
#include <linux/firmware.h>
#include <linux/uaccess.h>
-#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
#include <linux/initrd.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
@@ -243,7 +242,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_microcode_sanity
static void update_ucode_pointer(struct microcode_intel *mc)
{
- kfree(ucode_patch_va);
+ kvfree(ucode_patch_va);
/*
* Save the virtual address for early loading and for eventual free
@@ -254,11 +253,14 @@ static void update_ucode_pointer(struct
static void save_microcode_patch(struct microcode_intel *patch)
{
- struct microcode_intel *mc;
+ unsigned int size = get_totalsize(&patch->hdr);
+ struct microcode_intel *mc = NULL;
- mc = kmemdup(patch, get_totalsize(&patch->hdr), GFP_KERNEL);
+ mc = kvmemdup(patch, size, GFP_KERNEL);
if (mc)
update_ucode_pointer(mc);
+ else
+ pr_err("Unable to allocate microcode memory size: %u\n", size);
}
/* Scan CPIO for microcode matching the boot CPUs family, model, stepping */
@@ -530,36 +532,34 @@ static enum ucode_state read_ucode_intel
if (!copy_from_iter_full(&mc_header, sizeof(mc_header), iter)) {
pr_err("error! Truncated or inaccessible header in microcode data file\n");
- break;
+ goto fail;
}
mc_size = get_totalsize(&mc_header);
if (mc_size < sizeof(mc_header)) {
pr_err("error! Bad data in microcode data file (totalsize too small)\n");
- break;
+ goto fail;
}
-
data_size = mc_size - sizeof(mc_header);
if (data_size > iov_iter_count(iter)) {
pr_err("error! Bad data in microcode data file (truncated file?)\n");
- break;
+ goto fail;
}
/* For performance reasons, reuse mc area when possible */
if (!mc || mc_size > curr_mc_size) {
- vfree(mc);
- mc = vmalloc(mc_size);
+ kvfree(mc);
+ mc = kvmalloc(mc_size, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!mc)
- break;
+ goto fail;
curr_mc_size = mc_size;
}
memcpy(mc, &mc_header, sizeof(mc_header));
data = mc + sizeof(mc_header);
if (!copy_from_iter_full(data, data_size, iter) ||
- intel_microcode_sanity_check(mc, true, MC_HEADER_TYPE_MICROCODE) < 0) {
- break;
- }
+ intel_microcode_sanity_check(mc, true, MC_HEADER_TYPE_MICROCODE) < 0)
+ goto fail;
if (cur_rev >= mc_header.rev)
continue;
@@ -567,24 +567,26 @@ static enum ucode_state read_ucode_intel
if (!intel_find_matching_signature(mc, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
continue;
- vfree(new_mc);
+ kvfree(new_mc);
cur_rev = mc_header.rev;
new_mc = mc;
mc = NULL;
}
- vfree(mc);
-
- if (iov_iter_count(iter)) {
- vfree(new_mc);
- return UCODE_ERROR;
- }
+ if (iov_iter_count(iter))
+ goto fail;
+ kvfree(mc);
if (!new_mc)
return UCODE_NFOUND;
ucode_patch_late = (struct microcode_intel *)new_mc;
return UCODE_NEW;
+
+fail:
+ kvfree(mc);
+ kvfree(new_mc);
+ return UCODE_ERROR;
}
static bool is_blacklisted(unsigned int cpu)
@@ -643,9 +645,9 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcod
static void finalize_late_load(int result)
{
if (!result)
- save_microcode_patch(ucode_patch_late);
-
- vfree(ucode_patch_late);
+ update_ucode_pointer(ucode_patch_late);
+ else
+ kvfree(ucode_patch_late);
ucode_patch_late = NULL;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: Subject: [patch V3 09/30] x86/microcode/intel: Switch to kvmalloc()
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 09/30] x86/microcode/intel: Switch to kvmalloc() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-25 15:43 ` Qiuxu Zhuo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Qiuxu Zhuo @ 2023-09-25 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tglx; +Cc: arjan, bp, chang.seok.bae, linux-kernel, nik.borisov, x86,
qiuxu.zhuo
> ...
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> Microcode blobs are getting larger and might soon reach the kmalloc()
> limit. Switch over kvmalloc().
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> ---
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> ...
> static void save_microcode_patch(struct microcode_intel *patch)
> {
> - struct microcode_intel *mc;
> + unsigned int size = get_totalsize(&patch->hdr);
> + struct microcode_intel *mc = NULL;
No need to initialize the 'mc' to NULL as it's unconditionally
set by the following kmemdup().
>
> - mc = kmemdup(patch, get_totalsize(&patch->hdr), GFP_KERNEL);
> + mc = kvmemdup(patch, size, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (mc)
> update_ucode_pointer(mc);
> + else
> + pr_err("Unable to allocate microcode memory size: %u\n", size);
> }
>
> ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 10/30] x86/microcode/intel: Unify microcode apply() functions
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 09/30] x86/microcode/intel: Switch to kvmalloc() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-21 10:07 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 11/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rework intel_cpu_collect_info() Thomas Gleixner
` (21 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
Deduplicate the early and late apply() functions.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 105 +++++++++++-----------------------
1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -294,12 +294,11 @@ static __init struct microcode_intel *sc
return size ? NULL : patch;
}
-static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
+static enum ucode_state apply_microcode(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, struct microcode_intel *mc,
+ u32 *cur_rev)
{
- struct microcode_intel *mc;
- u32 rev, old_rev, date;
+ u32 rev;
- mc = uci->mc;
if (!mc)
return UCODE_NFOUND;
@@ -308,14 +307,12 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
* operation - when the other hyperthread has updated the microcode
* already.
*/
- rev = intel_get_microcode_revision();
- if (rev >= mc->hdr.rev) {
- uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev;
+ *cur_rev = intel_get_microcode_revision();
+ if (*cur_rev >= mc->hdr.rev) {
+ uci->cpu_sig.rev = *cur_rev;
return UCODE_OK;
}
- old_rev = rev;
-
/*
* Writeback and invalidate caches before updating microcode to avoid
* internal issues depending on what the microcode is updating.
@@ -330,13 +327,24 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
return UCODE_ERROR;
uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev;
-
- date = mc->hdr.date;
- pr_info_once("updated early: 0x%x -> 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
- old_rev, rev, date & 0xffff, date >> 24, (date >> 16) & 0xff);
return UCODE_UPDATED;
}
+static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
+{
+ struct microcode_intel *mc = uci->mc;
+ enum ucode_state ret;
+ u32 cur_rev, date;
+
+ ret = apply_microcode(uci, mc, &cur_rev);
+ if (ret == UCODE_UPDATED) {
+ date = mc->hdr.date;
+ pr_info_once("updated early: 0x%x -> 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
+ cur_rev, mc->hdr.rev, date & 0xffff, date >> 24, (date >> 16) & 0xff);
+ }
+ return ret;
+}
+
static __init bool load_builtin_intel_microcode(struct cpio_data *cp)
{
unsigned int eax = 1, ebx, ecx = 0, edx;
@@ -450,70 +458,29 @@ static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num,
return 0;
}
-static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_intel(int cpu)
+static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_late(int cpu)
{
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
- struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
- bool bsp = c->cpu_index == boot_cpu_data.cpu_index;
- struct microcode_intel *mc;
+ struct microcode_intel *mc = ucode_patch_late;
enum ucode_state ret;
- static int prev_rev;
- u32 rev;
-
- /* We should bind the task to the CPU */
- if (WARN_ON(raw_smp_processor_id() != cpu))
- return UCODE_ERROR;
-
- mc = ucode_patch_late;
- if (!mc)
- return UCODE_NFOUND;
+ u32 cur_rev;
- /*
- * Save us the MSR write below - which is a particular expensive
- * operation - when the other hyperthread has updated the microcode
- * already.
- */
- rev = intel_get_microcode_revision();
- if (rev >= mc->hdr.rev) {
- ret = UCODE_OK;
- goto out;
- }
-
- /*
- * Writeback and invalidate caches before updating microcode to avoid
- * internal issues depending on what the microcode is updating.
- */
- native_wbinvd();
-
- /* write microcode via MSR 0x79 */
- wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UCODE_WRITE, (unsigned long)mc->bits);
-
- rev = intel_get_microcode_revision();
-
- if (rev != mc->hdr.rev) {
- pr_err("CPU%d update to revision 0x%x failed\n",
- cpu, mc->hdr.rev);
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(smp_processor_id() != cpu))
return UCODE_ERROR;
- }
- if (bsp && rev != prev_rev) {
- pr_info("updated to revision 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
- rev,
- mc->hdr.date & 0xffff,
- mc->hdr.date >> 24,
+ ret = apply_microcode(uci, mc, &cur_rev);
+ if (ret != UCODE_UPDATED && ret != UCODE_OK)
+ return ret;
+
+ if (!cpu && uci->cpu_sig.rev != cur_rev) {
+ pr_info("Updated to revision 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
+ uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date & 0xffff, mc->hdr.date >> 24,
(mc->hdr.date >> 16) & 0xff);
- prev_rev = rev;
}
- ret = UCODE_UPDATED;
-
-out:
- uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev;
- c->microcode = rev;
-
- /* Update boot_cpu_data's revision too, if we're on the BSP: */
- if (bsp)
- boot_cpu_data.microcode = rev;
+ cpu_data(cpu).microcode = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
+ if (!cpu)
+ boot_cpu_data.microcode = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
return ret;
}
@@ -654,7 +621,7 @@ static void finalize_late_load(int resul
static struct microcode_ops microcode_intel_ops = {
.request_microcode_fw = request_microcode_fw,
.collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info,
- .apply_microcode = apply_microcode_intel,
+ .apply_microcode = apply_microcode_late,
.finalize_late_load = finalize_late_load,
};
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 10/30] x86/microcode/intel: Unify microcode apply() functions
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 10/30] x86/microcode/intel: Unify microcode apply() functions Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-21 10:07 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-21 10:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:59AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Deduplicate the early and late apply() functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 105 +++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -294,12 +294,11 @@ static __init struct microcode_intel *sc
> return size ? NULL : patch;
> }
>
> -static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
> +static enum ucode_state apply_microcode(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, struct microcode_intel *mc,
Err, we have
struct microcode_ops.apply_microcode()
already. Can we disambiguate those pls?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 11/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rework intel_cpu_collect_info()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:57 ` [patch V3 10/30] x86/microcode/intel: Unify microcode apply() functions Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info() Thomas Gleixner
` (20 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
Nothing needs struct ucode_cpu_info. Make it take struct cpu_signature, let
it return a boolean and simplify the implementation. Rename it now that the
silly name clash with collect_cpu_info() is gone.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: New patch
---
arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h | 4 ++--
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 33 +++++++++------------------------
drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c | 8 +++-----
3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
@@ -73,9 +73,9 @@ static inline void init_ia32_feat_ctl(st
extern __noendbr void cet_disable(void);
-struct ucode_cpu_info;
+struct cpu_signature;
-int intel_cpu_collect_info(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci);
+void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig);
static inline bool intel_cpu_signatures_match(unsigned int s1, unsigned int p1,
unsigned int s2, unsigned int p2)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -66,36 +66,21 @@ static inline unsigned int exttable_size
return et->count * EXT_SIGNATURE_SIZE + EXT_HEADER_SIZE;
}
-int intel_cpu_collect_info(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
+void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig)
{
- unsigned int val[2];
- unsigned int family, model;
- struct cpu_signature csig = { 0 };
- unsigned int eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
+ sig->sig = cpuid_eax(1);
+ sig->pf = 0;
+ sig->rev = intel_get_microcode_revision();
- memset(uci, 0, sizeof(*uci));
+ if (x86_model(sig->sig) >= 5 || x86_family(sig->sig) > 6) {
+ unsigned int val[2];
- eax = 0x00000001;
- ecx = 0;
- native_cpuid(&eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
- csig.sig = eax;
-
- family = x86_family(eax);
- model = x86_model(eax);
-
- if (model >= 5 || family > 6) {
/* get processor flags from MSR 0x17 */
native_rdmsr(MSR_IA32_PLATFORM_ID, val[0], val[1]);
- csig.pf = 1 << ((val[1] >> 18) & 7);
+ sig->pf = 1 << ((val[1] >> 18) & 7);
}
-
- csig.rev = intel_get_microcode_revision();
-
- uci->cpu_sig = csig;
-
- return 0;
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_cpu_collect_info);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_collect_cpu_info);
/*
* Returns 1 if update has been found, 0 otherwise.
@@ -381,7 +366,7 @@ static __init struct microcode_intel *ge
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return NULL;
- intel_cpu_collect_info(uci);
+ intel_collect_cpu_info(&uci->cpu_sig);
return scan_microcode(cp.data, cp.size, uci);
}
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c
@@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ static int scan_chunks_sanity_check(stru
static int image_sanity_check(struct device *dev, const struct microcode_header_intel *data)
{
- struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
+ struct cpu_signature sig;
/* Provide a specific error message when loading an older/unsupported image */
if (data->hdrver != MC_HEADER_TYPE_IFS) {
@@ -240,11 +240,9 @@ static int image_sanity_check(struct dev
return -EINVAL;
}
- intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
+ intel_collect_cpu_info(&sig);
- if (!intel_find_matching_signature((void *)data,
- uci.cpu_sig.sig,
- uci.cpu_sig.pf)) {
+ if (!intel_find_matching_signature((void *)data, sig.sig, sig.pf)) {
dev_err(dev, "cpu signature, processor flags not matching\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 11/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rework intel_cpu_collect_info() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-21 10:42 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 13/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rework intel_find_matching_signature() Thomas Gleixner
` (19 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
No point for an almost duplicate function.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: New patch
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 16 +---------------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -425,21 +425,7 @@ void reload_ucode_intel(void)
static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num, struct cpu_signature *csig)
{
- struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu_num);
- unsigned int val[2];
-
- memset(csig, 0, sizeof(*csig));
-
- csig->sig = cpuid_eax(0x00000001);
-
- if ((c->x86_model >= 5) || (c->x86 > 6)) {
- /* get processor flags from MSR 0x17 */
- rdmsr(MSR_IA32_PLATFORM_ID, val[0], val[1]);
- csig->pf = 1 << ((val[1] >> 18) & 7);
- }
-
- csig->rev = c->microcode;
-
+ intel_collect_cpu_info(csig);
return 0;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info()
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-21 10:42 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-25 10:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-21 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num, struct cpu_signature *csig)
You can get rid of that silly wrapper too and use
intel_collect_cpu_info() in the function pointer assignment directly.
Diff ontop:
---
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
index 4066dd3734ba..581ecfbaf134 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ extern __noendbr void cet_disable(void);
struct cpu_signature;
-void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig);
+void intel_collect_cpu_info(int unused, struct cpu_signature *sig);
static inline bool intel_cpu_signatures_match(unsigned int s1, unsigned int p1,
unsigned int s2, unsigned int p2)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
index 6c3b10e6b214..ebf0908fd91a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -652,7 +652,7 @@ void reload_ucode_amd(unsigned int cpu)
}
}
-static int collect_cpu_info_amd(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig)
+static void collect_cpu_info_amd(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig)
{
struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
@@ -670,8 +670,6 @@ static int collect_cpu_info_amd(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig)
uci->mc = p->data;
pr_info("CPU%d: patch_level=0x%08x\n", cpu, csig->rev);
-
- return 0;
}
static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_amd(int cpu)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index 6d67b92d7252..77e4120de641 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ static inline unsigned int exttable_size(struct extended_sigtable *et)
return et->count * EXT_SIGNATURE_SIZE + EXT_HEADER_SIZE;
}
-void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig)
+void intel_collect_cpu_info(int unused, struct cpu_signature *sig)
{
sig->sig = cpuid_eax(1);
sig->pf = 0;
@@ -362,7 +362,7 @@ static __init struct microcode_intel *get_ucode_from_cpio(struct ucode_cpu_info
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return NULL;
- intel_collect_cpu_info(&uci->cpu_sig);
+ intel_collect_cpu_info(0, &uci->cpu_sig);
return scan_microcode(cp.data, cp.size, uci);
}
@@ -423,12 +423,6 @@ void reload_ucode_intel(void)
apply_microcode_early(&uci, false);
}
-static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num, struct cpu_signature *csig)
-{
- intel_collect_cpu_info(csig);
- return 0;
-}
-
static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_late(int cpu)
{
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
@@ -591,7 +585,7 @@ static void finalize_late_load(int result)
static struct microcode_ops microcode_intel_ops = {
.request_microcode_fw = request_microcode_fw,
- .collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info,
+ .collect_cpu_info = intel_collect_cpu_info,
.apply_microcode = apply_microcode_late,
.finalize_late_load = finalize_late_load,
};
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
index 051b7956d4fd..b3753025cd4a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ struct microcode_ops {
* See also the "Synchronization" section in microcode_core.c.
*/
enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
- int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
+ void (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
};
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info()
2023-09-21 10:42 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-09-25 10:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-10-03 14:14 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-25 10:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Thu, Sep 21 2023 at 12:42, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num, struct cpu_signature *csig)
>
> You can get rid of that silly wrapper too and use
> intel_collect_cpu_info() in the function pointer assignment directly.
>
> Diff ontop:
>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
> index 4066dd3734ba..581ecfbaf134 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
> @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ extern __noendbr void cet_disable(void);
>
> struct cpu_signature;
>
> -void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig);
> +void intel_collect_cpu_info(int unused, struct cpu_signature *sig);
Eew. That's a function exposed to code outside of microcode and just
grows that unused argument for no value and you obviously forgot to
fixup the extern callsite :)
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
> index 051b7956d4fd..b3753025cd4a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
> @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ struct microcode_ops {
> * See also the "Synchronization" section in microcode_core.c.
> */
> enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
> - int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
> + void (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
> void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
Making this void makes sense, but that's a separate change.
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info()
2023-09-25 10:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-10-03 14:14 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-10-03 14:23 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-10-03 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 12:47:16PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Eew. That's a function exposed to code outside of microcode and just
> grows that unused argument for no value and you obviously forgot to
> fixup the extern callsite :)
It's used on AMD. Adding the below to the pile.
---
From: "Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@alien8.de>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 16:12:01 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] x86/microcode: Make microcode_ops.collect_cpu_info() return
void
Simplify code flow a bit more in the process.
No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230921104220.GHZQweDKyaJmkYdt4f@fat_crate.local
---
arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h | 2 +-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 4 +---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 12 +++---------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 2 +-
4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
index 4066dd3734ba..581ecfbaf134 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ extern __noendbr void cet_disable(void);
struct cpu_signature;
-void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig);
+void intel_collect_cpu_info(int unused, struct cpu_signature *sig);
static inline bool intel_cpu_signatures_match(unsigned int s1, unsigned int p1,
unsigned int s2, unsigned int p2)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
index 0f15e82a536c..5d1c2a716456 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -632,7 +632,7 @@ void reload_ucode_amd(unsigned int cpu)
}
}
-static int collect_cpu_info_amd(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig)
+static void collect_cpu_info_amd(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig)
{
struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
@@ -650,8 +650,6 @@ static int collect_cpu_info_amd(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig)
uci->mc = p->data;
pr_info("CPU%d: patch_level=0x%08x\n", cpu, csig->rev);
-
- return 0;
}
static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_amd(int cpu)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index 3817bb2ad6ac..0eff86a5ab8f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ static inline unsigned int exttable_size(struct extended_sigtable *et)
return et->count * EXT_SIGNATURE_SIZE + EXT_HEADER_SIZE;
}
-void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig)
+void intel_collect_cpu_info(int unused, struct cpu_signature *sig)
{
sig->sig = cpuid_eax(1);
sig->pf = 0;
@@ -363,7 +363,7 @@ static __init struct microcode_intel *get_microcode_blob(struct ucode_cpu_info *
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return NULL;
- intel_collect_cpu_info(&uci->cpu_sig);
+ intel_collect_cpu_info(0, &uci->cpu_sig);
return scan_microcode(cp.data, cp.size, uci);
}
@@ -424,12 +424,6 @@ void reload_ucode_intel(void)
apply_microcode_early(&uci);
}
-static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num, struct cpu_signature *csig)
-{
- intel_collect_cpu_info(csig);
- return 0;
-}
-
static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_late(int cpu)
{
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
@@ -592,7 +586,7 @@ static void finalize_late_load(int result)
static struct microcode_ops microcode_intel_ops = {
.request_microcode_fw = request_microcode_fw,
- .collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info,
+ .collect_cpu_info = intel_collect_cpu_info,
.apply_microcode = apply_microcode_late,
.finalize_late_load = finalize_late_load,
};
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
index 051b7956d4fd..b3753025cd4a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ struct microcode_ops {
* See also the "Synchronization" section in microcode_core.c.
*/
enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
- int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
+ void (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
};
--
2.42.0.rc0.25.ga82fb66fed25
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info()
2023-10-03 14:14 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-10-03 14:23 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-10-03 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 04:14:39PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 12:47:16PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Eew. That's a function exposed to code outside of microcode and just
> > grows that unused argument for no value and you obviously forgot to
> > fixup the extern callsite :)
>
> It's used on AMD. Adding the below to the pile.
And now that I look at it again, exposing that "unused" arg is uglier
than having the local wrapper in the loader code. Yeah, lemme zap that.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 13/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rework intel_find_matching_signature()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 14/30] x86/microcode/amd: Read revision from hardware in collect_cpu_info_amd() Thomas Gleixner
` (18 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
Take a cpu_signature argument and work from there. Move the match() helper
next to the callsite as there is no point for having it in a header.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: New patch
---
arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h | 16 +---------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++------------
drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h
@@ -77,22 +77,8 @@ struct cpu_signature;
void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig);
-static inline bool intel_cpu_signatures_match(unsigned int s1, unsigned int p1,
- unsigned int s2, unsigned int p2)
-{
- if (s1 != s2)
- return false;
-
- /* Processor flags are either both 0 ... */
- if (!p1 && !p2)
- return true;
-
- /* ... or they intersect. */
- return p1 & p2;
-}
-
extern u64 x86_read_arch_cap_msr(void);
-int intel_find_matching_signature(void *mc, unsigned int csig, int cpf);
+bool intel_find_matching_signature(void *mc, struct cpu_signature *sig);
int intel_microcode_sanity_check(void *mc, bool print_err, int hdr_type);
extern struct cpumask cpus_stop_mask;
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -82,29 +82,36 @@ void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_s
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_collect_cpu_info);
-/*
- * Returns 1 if update has been found, 0 otherwise.
- */
-int intel_find_matching_signature(void *mc, unsigned int csig, int cpf)
+static inline bool cpu_signatures_match(struct cpu_signature *s1, unsigned int sig2,
+ unsigned int pf2)
+{
+ if (s1->sig != sig2)
+ return false;
+
+ /* Processor flags are either both 0 or they intersect. */
+ return ((!s1->pf && !pf2) || (s1->pf & pf2));
+}
+
+bool intel_find_matching_signature(void *mc, struct cpu_signature *sig)
{
struct microcode_header_intel *mc_hdr = mc;
- struct extended_sigtable *ext_hdr;
struct extended_signature *ext_sig;
+ struct extended_sigtable *ext_hdr;
int i;
- if (intel_cpu_signatures_match(csig, cpf, mc_hdr->sig, mc_hdr->pf))
- return 1;
+ if (cpu_signatures_match(sig, mc_hdr->sig, mc_hdr->pf))
+ return true;
/* Look for ext. headers: */
if (get_totalsize(mc_hdr) <= intel_microcode_get_datasize(mc_hdr) + MC_HEADER_SIZE)
- return 0;
+ return false;
ext_hdr = mc + intel_microcode_get_datasize(mc_hdr) + MC_HEADER_SIZE;
ext_sig = (void *)ext_hdr + EXT_HEADER_SIZE;
for (i = 0; i < ext_hdr->count; i++) {
- if (intel_cpu_signatures_match(csig, cpf, ext_sig->sig, ext_sig->pf))
- return 1;
+ if (cpu_signatures_match(sig, ext_sig->sig, ext_sig->pf))
+ return true;
ext_sig++;
}
return 0;
@@ -265,7 +272,7 @@ static __init struct microcode_intel *sc
intel_microcode_sanity_check(data, false, MC_HEADER_TYPE_MICROCODE) < 0)
break;
- if (!intel_find_matching_signature(data, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
+ if (!intel_find_matching_signature(data, &uci->cpu_sig))
continue;
/* Check whether there is newer microcode */
@@ -502,7 +509,7 @@ static enum ucode_state read_ucode_intel
if (cur_rev >= mc_header.rev)
continue;
- if (!intel_find_matching_signature(mc, uci->cpu_sig.sig, uci->cpu_sig.pf))
+ if (!intel_find_matching_signature(mc, &uci->cpu_sig))
continue;
kvfree(new_mc);
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ static int image_sanity_check(struct dev
intel_collect_cpu_info(&sig);
- if (!intel_find_matching_signature((void *)data, sig.sig, sig.pf)) {
+ if (!intel_find_matching_signature((void *)data, &sig)) {
dev_err(dev, "cpu signature, processor flags not matching\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 14/30] x86/microcode/amd: Read revision from hardware in collect_cpu_info_amd()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 13/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rework intel_find_matching_signature() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 15/30] x86/microcode: Remove pointless apply() invocation Thomas Gleixner
` (17 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
Prepare to decrapify the core initialization logic which invokes
microcode_ops::apply_microcode() several times just to set
cpu_data::microcode.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: New patch
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -673,12 +673,12 @@ void reload_ucode_amd(unsigned int cpu)
static int collect_cpu_info_amd(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig)
{
- struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
+ u32 dummy __always_unused;
struct ucode_patch *p;
csig->sig = cpuid_eax(0x00000001);
- csig->rev = c->microcode;
+ rdmsr(MSR_AMD64_PATCH_LEVEL, csig->rev, dummy);
/*
* a patch could have been loaded early, set uci->mc so that
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 15/30] x86/microcode: Remove pointless apply() invocation
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 14/30] x86/microcode/amd: Read revision from hardware in collect_cpu_info_amd() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 16/30] x86/microcode: Get rid of the schedule work indirection Thomas Gleixner
` (16 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
Microcode is applied on the APs during early bringup. There is no point in
trying to apply the microcode again during the hotplug operations and
neither at the point where the microcode device is initialized.
Collect CPU info and microcode revision in setup_online_cpu() for now. This
will move to the CPU hotplug callback in the next step.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: New patch
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 34 ++++++----------------------------
include/linux/cpuhotplug.h | 1 -
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -511,17 +511,6 @@ static void microcode_fini_cpu(int cpu)
microcode_ops->microcode_fini_cpu(cpu);
}
-static enum ucode_state microcode_init_cpu(int cpu)
-{
- struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
-
- memset(uci, 0, sizeof(*uci));
-
- microcode_ops->collect_cpu_info(cpu, &uci->cpu_sig);
-
- return microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
-}
-
/**
* microcode_bsp_resume - Update boot CPU microcode during resume.
*/
@@ -540,15 +529,6 @@ static struct syscore_ops mc_syscore_ops
.resume = microcode_bsp_resume,
};
-static int mc_cpu_starting(unsigned int cpu)
-{
- enum ucode_state err = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
-
- pr_debug("%s: CPU%d, err: %d\n", __func__, cpu, err);
-
- return err == UCODE_ERROR;
-}
-
static int mc_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu)
{
struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
@@ -576,14 +556,14 @@ static int mc_cpu_down_prep(unsigned int
static void setup_online_cpu(struct work_struct *work)
{
int cpu = smp_processor_id();
- enum ucode_state err;
+ struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
- err = microcode_init_cpu(cpu);
- if (err == UCODE_ERROR) {
- pr_err("Error applying microcode on CPU%d\n", cpu);
- return;
- }
+ memset(uci, 0, sizeof(*uci));
+ microcode_ops->collect_cpu_info(cpu, &uci->cpu_sig);
+ cpu_data(cpu).microcode = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
+ if (!cpu)
+ boot_cpu_data.microcode = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
mc_cpu_online(cpu);
}
@@ -636,8 +616,6 @@ static int __init microcode_init(void)
schedule_on_each_cpu(setup_online_cpu);
register_syscore_ops(&mc_syscore_ops);
- cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(CPUHP_AP_MICROCODE_LOADER, "x86/microcode:starting",
- mc_cpu_starting, NULL);
cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN, "x86/microcode:online",
mc_cpu_online, mc_cpu_down_prep);
--- a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
+++ b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
@@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ enum cpuhp_state {
CPUHP_AP_IRQ_LOONGARCH_STARTING,
CPUHP_AP_IRQ_SIFIVE_PLIC_STARTING,
CPUHP_AP_ARM_MVEBU_COHERENCY,
- CPUHP_AP_MICROCODE_LOADER,
CPUHP_AP_PERF_X86_AMD_UNCORE_STARTING,
CPUHP_AP_PERF_X86_STARTING,
CPUHP_AP_PERF_X86_AMD_IBS_STARTING,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 16/30] x86/microcode: Get rid of the schedule work indirection
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 15/30] x86/microcode: Remove pointless apply() invocation Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 17/30] x86/microcode: Clean up mc_cpu_down_prep() Thomas Gleixner
` (15 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
Scheduling work on all CPUs to collect the microcode information is just
another extra step for no value. Let the CPU hotplug callback registration
do it.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: New patch
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 29 ++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -531,8 +531,16 @@ static struct syscore_ops mc_syscore_ops
static int mc_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu)
{
+ struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
+ memset(uci, 0, sizeof(*uci));
+
+ microcode_ops->collect_cpu_info(cpu, &uci->cpu_sig);
+ cpu_data(cpu).microcode = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
+ if (!cpu)
+ boot_cpu_data.microcode = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
+
if (sysfs_create_group(&dev->kobj, &mc_attr_group))
pr_err("Failed to create group for CPU%d\n", cpu);
return 0;
@@ -553,20 +561,6 @@ static int mc_cpu_down_prep(unsigned int
return 0;
}
-static void setup_online_cpu(struct work_struct *work)
-{
- int cpu = smp_processor_id();
- struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
-
- memset(uci, 0, sizeof(*uci));
-
- microcode_ops->collect_cpu_info(cpu, &uci->cpu_sig);
- cpu_data(cpu).microcode = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
- if (!cpu)
- boot_cpu_data.microcode = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
- mc_cpu_online(cpu);
-}
-
static struct attribute *cpu_root_microcode_attrs[] = {
#ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE_LATE_LOADING
&dev_attr_reload.attr,
@@ -612,12 +606,9 @@ static int __init microcode_init(void)
}
}
- /* Do per-CPU setup */
- schedule_on_each_cpu(setup_online_cpu);
-
register_syscore_ops(&mc_syscore_ops);
- cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN, "x86/microcode:online",
- mc_cpu_online, mc_cpu_down_prep);
+ cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN, "x86/microcode:online",
+ mc_cpu_online, mc_cpu_down_prep);
pr_info("Microcode Update Driver: v%s.", DRIVER_VERSION);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 17/30] x86/microcode: Clean up mc_cpu_down_prep()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 16/30] x86/microcode: Get rid of the schedule work indirection Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 18/30] x86/microcode: Handle "nosmt" correctly Thomas Gleixner
` (14 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
This function has nothing to do with suspend. It's a hotplug
callback. Remove the bogus comment.
Drop the pointless debug printk. The hotplug core provides tracepoints
which track the invocation of those callbacks.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
V2: New patch
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 8 +-------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -569,16 +569,10 @@ static int mc_cpu_online(unsigned int cp
static int mc_cpu_down_prep(unsigned int cpu)
{
- struct device *dev;
-
- dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
+ struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
microcode_fini_cpu(cpu);
-
- /* Suspend is in progress, only remove the interface */
sysfs_remove_group(&dev->kobj, &mc_attr_group);
- pr_debug("%s: CPU%d\n", __func__, cpu);
-
return 0;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 18/30] x86/microcode: Handle "nosmt" correctly
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 17/30] x86/microcode: Clean up mc_cpu_down_prep() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-22 13:42 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 19/30] x86/microcode: Clarify the late load logic Thomas Gleixner
` (13 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
On CPUs where microcode loading is not NMI safe the SMT sibling which is
parked in one of the play_dead() variants, these parked CPUs still react
on NMIs. So if a NMI hits while the primary thread updates the microcode
the resulting behaviour is undefined. The default play_dead()
implementation on modern CPUs is using MWAIT, which is not guaranteed to
be safe against an microcode update which affects MWAIT.
Take the cpus_booted_once_mask into account to detect this case and refuse
to load late if the vendor specific driver does not advertise that late
loading is NMI safe.
AMD stated that this is safe, so mark the AMD driver accordingly.
This requirement will be partially lifted in later changes.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/Kconfig | 2 -
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 9 +++--
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 13 +++----
4 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -1314,7 +1314,7 @@ config MICROCODE
config MICROCODE_LATE_LOADING
bool "Late microcode loading (DANGEROUS)"
default n
- depends on MICROCODE
+ depends on MICROCODE && SMP
help
Loading microcode late, when the system is up and executing instructions
is a tricky business and should be avoided if possible. Just the sequence
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -948,10 +948,11 @@ static void microcode_fini_cpu_amd(int c
}
static struct microcode_ops microcode_amd_ops = {
- .request_microcode_fw = request_microcode_amd,
- .collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info_amd,
- .apply_microcode = apply_microcode_amd,
- .microcode_fini_cpu = microcode_fini_cpu_amd,
+ .request_microcode_fw = request_microcode_amd,
+ .collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info_amd,
+ .apply_microcode = apply_microcode_amd,
+ .microcode_fini_cpu = microcode_fini_cpu_amd,
+ .nmi_safe = true,
};
struct microcode_ops * __init init_amd_microcode(void)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -326,23 +326,6 @@ static struct platform_device *microcode
*/
#define SPINUNIT 100 /* 100 nsec */
-static int check_online_cpus(void)
-{
- unsigned int cpu;
-
- /*
- * Make sure all CPUs are online. It's fine for SMT to be disabled if
- * all the primary threads are still online.
- */
- for_each_present_cpu(cpu) {
- if (topology_is_primary_thread(cpu) && !cpu_online(cpu)) {
- pr_err("Not all CPUs online, aborting microcode update.\n");
- return -EINVAL;
- }
- }
-
- return 0;
-}
static atomic_t late_cpus_in;
static atomic_t late_cpus_out;
@@ -459,6 +442,35 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
return ret;
}
+/*
+ * Ensure that all required CPUs which are present and have been booted
+ * once are online.
+ *
+ * To pass this check, all primary threads must be online.
+ *
+ * If the microcode load is not safe against NMI then all SMT threads
+ * must be online as well because they still react on NMI when they are
+ * soft-offlined and parked in one of the play_dead() variants. So if a
+ * NMI hits while the primary thread updates the microcode the resulting
+ * behaviour is undefined. The default play_dead() implementation on
+ * modern CPUs is using MWAIT, which is also not guaranteed to be safe
+ * against a microcode update which affects MWAIT.
+ */
+static bool ensure_cpus_are_online(void)
+{
+ unsigned int cpu;
+
+ for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
+ if (!cpu_online(cpu)) {
+ if (topology_is_primary_thread(cpu) || !microcode_ops->nmi_safe) {
+ pr_err("CPU %u not online\n", cpu);
+ return false;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ return true;
+}
+
static ssize_t reload_store(struct device *dev,
struct device_attribute *attr,
const char *buf, size_t size)
@@ -474,9 +486,10 @@ static ssize_t reload_store(struct devic
cpus_read_lock();
- ret = check_online_cpus();
- if (ret)
+ if (!ensure_cpus_are_online()) {
+ ret = -EBUSY;
goto put;
+ }
tmp_ret = microcode_ops->request_microcode_fw(bsp, µcode_pdev->dev);
if (tmp_ret != UCODE_NEW)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -20,18 +20,17 @@ enum ucode_state {
struct microcode_ops {
enum ucode_state (*request_microcode_fw)(int cpu, struct device *dev);
-
void (*microcode_fini_cpu)(int cpu);
/*
- * The generic 'microcode_core' part guarantees that
- * the callbacks below run on a target cpu when they
- * are being called.
+ * The generic 'microcode_core' part guarantees that the callbacks
+ * below run on a target cpu when they are being called.
* See also the "Synchronization" section in microcode_core.c.
*/
- enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
- int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
- void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
+ enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
+ int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
+ void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
+ unsigned int nmi_safe : 1;
};
extern struct ucode_cpu_info ucode_cpu_info[];
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 18/30] x86/microcode: Handle "nosmt" correctly
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 18/30] x86/microcode: Handle "nosmt" correctly Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-22 13:42 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-22 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
Just textual nitpicks. Otherwise looks nice.
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:12AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> On CPUs where microcode loading is not NMI safe the SMT sibling which is
> parked in one of the play_dead() variants, these parked CPUs still react
> on NMIs.
s/, these parked CPUs still react/still reacts/.
Simpler.
> So if a NMI hits while the primary thread updates the microcode
> the resulting behaviour is undefined. The default play_dead()
> implementation on modern CPUs is using MWAIT, which is not guaranteed to
> be safe against an microcode update which affects MWAIT.
s/an //
> +/*
> + * Ensure that all required CPUs which are present and have been booted
> + * once are online.
> + *
> + * To pass this check, all primary threads must be online.
> + *
> + * If the microcode load is not safe against NMI then all SMT threads
> + * must be online as well because they still react on NMI when they are
s/react on NMI/react to NMIs/
> + * soft-offlined and parked in one of the play_dead() variants. So if a
> + * NMI hits while the primary thread updates the microcode the resulting
> + * behaviour is undefined. The default play_dead() implementation on
> + * modern CPUs is using MWAIT, which is also not guaranteed to be safe
s/is using/uses/
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
> @@ -20,18 +20,17 @@ enum ucode_state {
>
> struct microcode_ops {
> enum ucode_state (*request_microcode_fw)(int cpu, struct device *dev);
> -
> void (*microcode_fini_cpu)(int cpu);
>
> /*
> - * The generic 'microcode_core' part guarantees that
> - * the callbacks below run on a target cpu when they
> - * are being called.
> + * The generic 'microcode_core' part guarantees that the callbacks
> + * below run on a target cpu when they are being called.
s/cpu/CPU/
while at it.
> * See also the "Synchronization" section in microcode_core.c.
> */
> - enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
> - int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
> - void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
> + enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
> + int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
> + void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
> + unsigned int nmi_safe : 1;
> };
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 19/30] x86/microcode: Clarify the late load logic
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 18/30] x86/microcode: Handle "nosmt" correctly Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-22 15:59 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 20/30] x86/microcode: Sanitize __wait_for_cpus() Thomas Gleixner
` (12 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
reload_store() is way too complicated. Split the inner workings out and
make the following enhancements:
- Taint the kernel only when the microcode was actually updated. If. e.g.
the rendevouz fails, then nothing happened and there is no reason for
tainting.
- Return useful error codes
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 39 +++++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -434,11 +434,11 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
pr_info("Reload succeeded, microcode revision: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n",
old, boot_cpu_data.microcode);
microcode_check(&prev_info);
+ add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
} else {
pr_info("Reload failed, current microcode revision: 0x%x\n",
boot_cpu_data.microcode);
}
-
return ret;
}
@@ -471,40 +471,35 @@ static bool ensure_cpus_are_online(void)
return true;
}
+static int ucode_load_late_locked(void)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ if (!ensure_cpus_are_online())
+ return -EBUSY;
+
+ ret = microcode_ops->request_microcode_fw(0, µcode_pdev->dev);
+ if (ret != UCODE_NEW)
+ return ret == UCODE_NFOUND ? -ENOENT : -EBADFD;
+ return microcode_reload_late();
+}
+
static ssize_t reload_store(struct device *dev,
struct device_attribute *attr,
const char *buf, size_t size)
{
- enum ucode_state tmp_ret = UCODE_OK;
- int bsp = boot_cpu_data.cpu_index;
unsigned long val;
- ssize_t ret = 0;
+ ssize_t ret;
ret = kstrtoul(buf, 0, &val);
if (ret || val != 1)
return -EINVAL;
cpus_read_lock();
-
- if (!ensure_cpus_are_online()) {
- ret = -EBUSY;
- goto put;
- }
-
- tmp_ret = microcode_ops->request_microcode_fw(bsp, µcode_pdev->dev);
- if (tmp_ret != UCODE_NEW)
- goto put;
-
- ret = microcode_reload_late();
-put:
+ ret = ucode_load_late_locked();
cpus_read_unlock();
- if (ret == 0)
- ret = size;
-
- add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
-
- return ret;
+ return ret ? : size;
}
static DEVICE_ATTR_WO(reload);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 19/30] x86/microcode: Clarify the late load logic
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 19/30] x86/microcode: Clarify the late load logic Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-22 15:59 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-22 15:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:13AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> + ret = microcode_ops->request_microcode_fw(0, µcode_pdev->dev);
> + if (ret != UCODE_NEW)
> + return ret == UCODE_NFOUND ? -ENOENT : -EBADFD;
I know this is short but let's make it more boring and readable pls:
if (ret != UCODE_NEW) {
if (ret == UCODE_NFOUND)
return -ENOENT;
else
return -EBADFD;
}
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 20/30] x86/microcode: Sanitize __wait_for_cpus()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 19/30] x86/microcode: Clarify the late load logic Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-22 16:24 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 21/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU result state Thomas Gleixner
` (11 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
The code is too complicated for no reason:
- The return value is pointless as this is a strict boolean.
- It's way simpler to count down from num_online_cpus() and check for
zero.
- The timeout argument is pointless as this is always one second.
- Touching the NMI watchdog every 100ns does not make any sense, neither
does checking every 100ns. This is really not a hotpath operation.
Preload the atomic counter with the number of online CPUs and simplify the
whole timeout logic. Delay for one microsecond and touch the NMI watchdog
once per millisecond.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 41 ++++++++++++++---------------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -324,31 +324,24 @@ static struct platform_device *microcode
* requirement can be relaxed in the future. Right now, this is conservative
* and good.
*/
-#define SPINUNIT 100 /* 100 nsec */
+static atomic_t late_cpus_in, late_cpus_out;
-
-static atomic_t late_cpus_in;
-static atomic_t late_cpus_out;
-
-static int __wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *t, long long timeout)
+static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
{
- int all_cpus = num_online_cpus();
-
- atomic_inc(t);
-
- while (atomic_read(t) < all_cpus) {
- if (timeout < SPINUNIT) {
- pr_err("Timeout while waiting for CPUs rendezvous, remaining: %d\n",
- all_cpus - atomic_read(t));
- return 1;
- }
+ unsigned int timeout;
- ndelay(SPINUNIT);
- timeout -= SPINUNIT;
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(atomic_dec_return(cnt) < 0);
- touch_nmi_watchdog();
+ for (timeout = 0; timeout < USEC_PER_SEC; timeout++) {
+ if (!atomic_read(cnt))
+ return true;
+ udelay(1);
+ if (!(timeout % 1000))
+ touch_nmi_watchdog();
}
- return 0;
+ /* Prevent the late comers to make progress and let them time out */
+ atomic_inc(cnt);
+ return false;
}
/*
@@ -366,7 +359,7 @@ static int __reload_late(void *info)
* Wait for all CPUs to arrive. A load will not be attempted unless all
* CPUs show up.
* */
- if (__wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in, NSEC_PER_SEC))
+ if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in))
return -1;
/*
@@ -389,7 +382,7 @@ static int __reload_late(void *info)
}
wait_for_siblings:
- if (__wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_out, NSEC_PER_SEC))
+ if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_out))
panic("Timeout during microcode update!\n");
/*
@@ -416,8 +409,8 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
pr_err("Attempting late microcode loading - it is dangerous and taints the kernel.\n");
pr_err("You should switch to early loading, if possible.\n");
- atomic_set(&late_cpus_in, 0);
- atomic_set(&late_cpus_out, 0);
+ atomic_set(&late_cpus_in, num_online_cpus());
+ atomic_set(&late_cpus_out, num_online_cpus());
/*
* Take a snapshot before the microcode update in order to compare and
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 20/30] x86/microcode: Sanitize __wait_for_cpus()
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 20/30] x86/microcode: Sanitize __wait_for_cpus() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-22 16:24 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-26 8:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-22 16:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:15AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> + for (timeout = 0; timeout < USEC_PER_SEC; timeout++) {
> + if (!atomic_read(cnt))
> + return true;
<---- newline here.
> + udelay(1);
And here.
Otherwise it looks too crammed.
> + if (!(timeout % 1000))
MSEC_PER_SEC - no naked numbers pls.
> + touch_nmi_watchdog();
> }
> - return 0;
> + /* Prevent the late comers to make progress and let them time out */
s/to make progress/from making progress/
Nice, otherwise.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 20/30] x86/microcode: Sanitize __wait_for_cpus()
2023-09-22 16:24 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-09-26 8:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-27 7:56 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-26 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Fri, Sep 22 2023 at 18:24, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:15AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> + for (timeout = 0; timeout < USEC_PER_SEC; timeout++) {
>> + if (!atomic_read(cnt))
>> + return true;
>
> <---- newline here.
>
>> + udelay(1);
>
> And here.
>
> Otherwise it looks too crammed.
Oh well.
>> + if (!(timeout % 1000))
>
> MSEC_PER_SEC - no naked numbers pls.
MSEC_PER_SEC? Thats really wrong because timeout counts in microseconds,
no? So USEC_PER_MSEC.
>> + touch_nmi_watchdog();
>> }
>> - return 0;
>> + /* Prevent the late comers to make progress and let them time out */
>
> s/to make progress/from making progress/
>
> Nice, otherwise.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 20/30] x86/microcode: Sanitize __wait_for_cpus()
2023-09-26 8:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-27 7:56 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-27 7:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:51:33AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> MSEC_PER_SEC? Thats really wrong because timeout counts in microseconds,
> no? So USEC_PER_MSEC.
Doh, yes.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 21/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU result state
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (19 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 20/30] x86/microcode: Sanitize __wait_for_cpus() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-24 6:29 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 22/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU control field Thomas Gleixner
` (10 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
The microcode rendevouz is purely acting on global state, which does not
allow to analyze fails in a coherent way.
Introduce per CPU state where the results are written into, which allows to
analyze the return codes of the individual CPUs.
Initialize the state when walking the cpu_present_mask in the online check
to avoid another for_each_cpu() loop.
Enhance the result print out with that.
The structure is intentionally named ucode_ctrl as it will gain control
fields in subsequent changes.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 108 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 1
2 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -324,6 +324,11 @@ static struct platform_device *microcode
* requirement can be relaxed in the future. Right now, this is conservative
* and good.
*/
+struct ucode_ctrl {
+ enum ucode_state result;
+};
+
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
static atomic_t late_cpus_in, late_cpus_out;
static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
@@ -344,23 +349,19 @@ static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
return false;
}
-/*
- * Returns:
- * < 0 - on error
- * 0 - success (no update done or microcode was updated)
- */
-static int __reload_late(void *info)
+static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
{
int cpu = smp_processor_id();
- enum ucode_state err;
- int ret = 0;
+ enum ucode_state ret;
/*
* Wait for all CPUs to arrive. A load will not be attempted unless all
* CPUs show up.
* */
- if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in))
- return -1;
+ if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
+ return 0;
+ }
/*
* On an SMT system, it suffices to load the microcode on one sibling of
@@ -369,17 +370,11 @@ static int __reload_late(void *info)
* loading attempts happen on multiple threads of an SMT core. See
* below.
*/
- if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) == cpu)
- err = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
- else
+ if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) != cpu)
goto wait_for_siblings;
- if (err >= UCODE_NFOUND) {
- if (err == UCODE_ERROR) {
- pr_warn("Error reloading microcode on CPU %d\n", cpu);
- ret = -1;
- }
- }
+ ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
wait_for_siblings:
if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_out))
@@ -391,19 +386,18 @@ static int __reload_late(void *info)
* per-cpu cpuinfo can be updated with right microcode
* revision.
*/
- if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) != cpu)
- err = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
+ if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) == cpu)
+ return 0;
- return ret;
+ ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
+ return 0;
}
-/*
- * Reload microcode late on all CPUs. Wait for a sec until they
- * all gather together.
- */
-static int microcode_reload_late(void)
+static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(void)
{
- int old = boot_cpu_data.microcode, ret;
+ unsigned int cpu, updated = 0, failed = 0, timedout = 0, siblings = 0;
+ int old_rev = boot_cpu_data.microcode;
struct cpuinfo_x86 prev_info;
pr_err("Attempting late microcode loading - it is dangerous and taints the kernel.\n");
@@ -418,26 +412,47 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
*/
store_cpu_caps(&prev_info);
- ret = stop_machine_cpuslocked(__reload_late, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
+ stop_machine_cpuslocked(ucode_load_cpus_stopped, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
+
+ /* Analyze the results */
+ for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
+ switch (per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.result, cpu)) {
+ case UCODE_UPDATED: updated++; break;
+ case UCODE_TIMEOUT: timedout++; break;
+ case UCODE_OK: siblings++; break;
+ default: failed++; break;
+ }
+ }
if (microcode_ops->finalize_late_load)
- microcode_ops->finalize_late_load(ret);
+ microcode_ops->finalize_late_load(!updated);
- if (!ret) {
- pr_info("Reload succeeded, microcode revision: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n",
- old, boot_cpu_data.microcode);
- microcode_check(&prev_info);
- add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
- } else {
- pr_info("Reload failed, current microcode revision: 0x%x\n",
- boot_cpu_data.microcode);
+ if (!updated) {
+ /* Nothing changed. */
+ if (!failed && !timedout)
+ return 0;
+ pr_err("Microcode update failed: %u CPUs failed %u CPUs timed out\n",
+ failed, timedout);
+ return -EIO;
}
- return ret;
+
+ add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
+ pr_info("Microcode load: updated on %u primary CPUs with %u siblings\n", updated, siblings);
+ if (failed || timedout) {
+ pr_err("Microcode load incomplete. %u CPUs timed out or failed\n",
+ num_online_cpus() - (updated + siblings));
+ }
+ pr_info("Microcode revision: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n", old_rev, boot_cpu_data.microcode);
+ microcode_check(&prev_info);
+
+ return updated + siblings == num_online_cpus() ? 0 : -EIO;
}
/*
- * Ensure that all required CPUs which are present and have been booted
- * once are online.
+ * This function does two things:
+ *
+ * 1) Ensure that all required CPUs which are present and have been booted
+ * once are online.
*
* To pass this check, all primary threads must be online.
*
@@ -448,9 +463,12 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
* behaviour is undefined. The default play_dead() implementation on
* modern CPUs is using MWAIT, which is also not guaranteed to be safe
* against a microcode update which affects MWAIT.
+ *
+ * 2) Initialize the per CPU control structure
*/
-static bool ensure_cpus_are_online(void)
+static bool ucode_setup_cpus(void)
{
+ struct ucode_ctrl ctrl = { .result = -1, };
unsigned int cpu;
for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
@@ -460,6 +478,8 @@ static bool ensure_cpus_are_online(void)
return false;
}
}
+ /* Initialize the per CPU state */
+ per_cpu(ucode_ctrl, cpu) = ctrl;
}
return true;
}
@@ -468,13 +488,13 @@ static int ucode_load_late_locked(void)
{
int ret;
- if (!ensure_cpus_are_online())
+ if (!ucode_setup_cpus())
return -EBUSY;
ret = microcode_ops->request_microcode_fw(0, µcode_pdev->dev);
if (ret != UCODE_NEW)
return ret == UCODE_NFOUND ? -ENOENT : -EBADFD;
- return microcode_reload_late();
+ return ucode_load_late_stop_cpus();
}
static ssize_t reload_store(struct device *dev,
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ enum ucode_state {
UCODE_UPDATED,
UCODE_NFOUND,
UCODE_ERROR,
+ UCODE_TIMEOUT,
};
struct microcode_ops {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 21/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU result state
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 21/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU result state Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-24 6:29 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-26 9:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-24 6:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:16AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> The microcode rendevouz is purely acting on global state, which does not
rendezvous
> allow to analyze fails in a coherent way.
>
> Introduce per CPU state where the results are written into, which allows to
> analyze the return codes of the individual CPUs.
>
> Initialize the state when walking the cpu_present_mask in the online check
> to avoid another for_each_cpu() loop.
>
> Enhance the result print out with that.
>
> The structure is intentionally named ucode_ctrl as it will gain control
> fields in subsequent changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 108 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 1
> 2 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
> ---
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
> @@ -324,6 +324,11 @@ static struct platform_device *microcode
> * requirement can be relaxed in the future. Right now, this is conservative
> * and good.
> */
> +struct ucode_ctrl {
microcode_ctrl
I know "ucode" is shorter but we already call everything new-er
"microcode_" and this'll cause confusion.
> + enum ucode_state result;
> +};
> +
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
You could do
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct microcode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
so that the naming is different too.
> static atomic_t late_cpus_in, late_cpus_out;
>
> static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
> @@ -344,23 +349,19 @@ static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
> return false;
> }
>
> -/*
> - * Returns:
> - * < 0 - on error
> - * 0 - success (no update done or microcode was updated)
> - */
> -static int __reload_late(void *info)
> +static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
No need for "ucode_" prefixes to static functions.
> {
> int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> - enum ucode_state err;
> - int ret = 0;
> + enum ucode_state ret;
>
> /*
> * Wait for all CPUs to arrive. A load will not be attempted unless all
> * CPUs show up.
> * */
> - if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in))
> - return -1;
> + if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
> + return 0;
So the only value this function returns is 0 now.
stop_machine_cpuslocked() still does pay attention at ret so I guess it
should return non-null/negative on error or so?
> /*
> * On an SMT system, it suffices to load the microcode on one sibling of
> @@ -369,17 +370,11 @@ static int __reload_late(void *info)
> * loading attempts happen on multiple threads of an SMT core. See
> * below.
> */
> - if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) == cpu)
> - err = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
> - else
> + if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) != cpu)
> goto wait_for_siblings;
>
> - if (err >= UCODE_NFOUND) {
> - if (err == UCODE_ERROR) {
> - pr_warn("Error reloading microcode on CPU %d\n", cpu);
> - ret = -1;
> - }
> - }
> + ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
>
> wait_for_siblings:
> if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_out))
> @@ -391,19 +386,18 @@ static int __reload_late(void *info)
> * per-cpu cpuinfo can be updated with right microcode
> * revision.
> */
> - if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) != cpu)
> - err = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
> + if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) == cpu)
> + return 0;
>
> - return ret;
> + ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
> + return 0;
> }
>
> -/*
> - * Reload microcode late on all CPUs. Wait for a sec until they
> - * all gather together.
> - */
> -static int microcode_reload_late(void)
> +static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(void)
s/ucode_//
> {
> - int old = boot_cpu_data.microcode, ret;
> + unsigned int cpu, updated = 0, failed = 0, timedout = 0, siblings = 0;
> + int old_rev = boot_cpu_data.microcode;
> struct cpuinfo_x86 prev_info;
>
> pr_err("Attempting late microcode loading - it is dangerous and taints the kernel.\n");
> @@ -418,26 +412,47 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
> */
> store_cpu_caps(&prev_info);
>
> - ret = stop_machine_cpuslocked(__reload_late, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
> + stop_machine_cpuslocked(ucode_load_cpus_stopped, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
> +
> + /* Analyze the results */
> + for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
> + switch (per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.result, cpu)) {
> + case UCODE_UPDATED: updated++; break;
> + case UCODE_TIMEOUT: timedout++; break;
> + case UCODE_OK: siblings++; break;
> + default: failed++; break;
> + }
Align vertically.
> + }
>
> if (microcode_ops->finalize_late_load)
> - microcode_ops->finalize_late_load(ret);
> + microcode_ops->finalize_late_load(!updated);
>
> - if (!ret) {
> - pr_info("Reload succeeded, microcode revision: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n",
> - old, boot_cpu_data.microcode);
> - microcode_check(&prev_info);
> - add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
> - } else {
> - pr_info("Reload failed, current microcode revision: 0x%x\n",
> - boot_cpu_data.microcode);
> + if (!updated) {
> + /* Nothing changed. */
> + if (!failed && !timedout)
> + return 0;
> + pr_err("Microcode update failed: %u CPUs failed %u CPUs timed out\n",
> + failed, timedout);
> + return -EIO;
> }
> - return ret;
> +
> + add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
> + pr_info("Microcode load: updated on %u primary CPUs with %u siblings\n", updated, siblings);
> + if (failed || timedout) {
> + pr_err("Microcode load incomplete. %u CPUs timed out or failed\n",
> + num_online_cpus() - (updated + siblings));
> + }
> + pr_info("Microcode revision: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n", old_rev, boot_cpu_data.microcode);
You don't need "Microcode" in those strings - the pr_info has already
"microcode:" as prefix.
> + microcode_check(&prev_info);
> +
> + return updated + siblings == num_online_cpus() ? 0 : -EIO;
> }
>
> /*
> - * Ensure that all required CPUs which are present and have been booted
> - * once are online.
> + * This function does two things:
> + *
> + * 1) Ensure that all required CPUs which are present and have been booted
> + * once are online.
> *
> * To pass this check, all primary threads must be online.
> *
> @@ -448,9 +463,12 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
> * behaviour is undefined. The default play_dead() implementation on
> * modern CPUs is using MWAIT, which is also not guaranteed to be safe
> * against a microcode update which affects MWAIT.
> + *
> + * 2) Initialize the per CPU control structure
> */
> -static bool ensure_cpus_are_online(void)
> +static bool ucode_setup_cpus(void)
s/ucode_//
> {
> + struct ucode_ctrl ctrl = { .result = -1, };
> unsigned int cpu;
>
> for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 21/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU result state
2023-09-24 6:29 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-09-26 9:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-27 11:28 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-26 9:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Sun, Sep 24 2023 at 08:29, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:16AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> +struct ucode_ctrl {
>
> microcode_ctrl
>
> I know "ucode" is shorter but we already call everything new-er
> "microcode_" and this'll cause confusion.
That starts to get silly. The struct is used only in the microcode realm
and nothing which is globally visible. ucode is a pretty obvious and
established shortcut. But so what....
>> + enum ucode_state result;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
>
> You could do
>
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct microcode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
>
> so that the naming is different too.
And that solves what?
>> static atomic_t late_cpus_in, late_cpus_out;
>>
>> static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
>> @@ -344,23 +349,19 @@ static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
>> return false;
>> }
>>
>> -/*
>> - * Returns:
>> - * < 0 - on error
>> - * 0 - success (no update done or microcode was updated)
>> - */
>> -static int __reload_late(void *info)
>> +static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
>
> No need for "ucode_" prefixes to static functions.
What's the problem with that prefix? The function name clearly says what
this is doing.
>> {
>> int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>> - enum ucode_state err;
>> - int ret = 0;
>> + enum ucode_state ret;
>>
>> /*
>> * Wait for all CPUs to arrive. A load will not be attempted unless all
>> * CPUs show up.
>> * */
>> - if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in))
>> - return -1;
>> + if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
>> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
>> + return 0;
>
> So the only value this function returns is 0 now.
> stop_machine_cpuslocked() still does pay attention at ret so I guess it
> should return non-null/negative on error or so?
Nope, because stop_machine_cpuslocked() does not usefully accumulate
results from all involved CPUs. But it can return errors related to the
invocation itself, which is a completely different story.
That's why ucode_ctrl.result is per CPU and has to be evaluated
separately.
>> - ret = stop_machine_cpuslocked(__reload_late, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
>> + stop_machine_cpuslocked(ucode_load_cpus_stopped, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
>> +
>> + /* Analyze the results */
>> + for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
>> + switch (per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.result, cpu)) {
>> + case UCODE_UPDATED: updated++; break;
>> + case UCODE_TIMEOUT: timedout++; break;
>> + case UCODE_OK: siblings++; break;
>> + default: failed++; break;
>> + }
>
> Align vertically.
Align what?
>> + }
>>
>> if (microcode_ops->finalize_late_load)
>> - microcode_ops->finalize_late_load(ret);
>> + microcode_ops->finalize_late_load(!updated);
>>
>> - if (!ret) {
>> - pr_info("Reload succeeded, microcode revision: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n",
>> - old, boot_cpu_data.microcode);
>> - microcode_check(&prev_info);
>> - add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
>> - } else {
>> - pr_info("Reload failed, current microcode revision: 0x%x\n",
>> - boot_cpu_data.microcode);
>> + if (!updated) {
>> + /* Nothing changed. */
>> + if (!failed && !timedout)
>> + return 0;
>> + pr_err("Microcode update failed: %u CPUs failed %u CPUs timed out\n",
>> + failed, timedout);
>> + return -EIO;
>> }
>> - return ret;
>> +
>> + add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
>> + pr_info("Microcode load: updated on %u primary CPUs with %u siblings\n", updated, siblings);
>> + if (failed || timedout) {
>> + pr_err("Microcode load incomplete. %u CPUs timed out or failed\n",
>> + num_online_cpus() - (updated + siblings));
>> + }
>> + pr_info("Microcode revision: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n", old_rev, boot_cpu_data.microcode);
>
> You don't need "Microcode" in those strings - the pr_info has already
> "microcode:" as prefix.
True.
>> @@ -448,9 +463,12 @@ static int microcode_reload_late(void)
>> * behaviour is undefined. The default play_dead() implementation on
>> * modern CPUs is using MWAIT, which is also not guaranteed to be safe
>> * against a microcode update which affects MWAIT.
>> + *
>> + * 2) Initialize the per CPU control structure
>> */
>> -static bool ensure_cpus_are_online(void)
>> +static bool ucode_setup_cpus(void)
>
> s/ucode_//
and setup_cpus() then tells what?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 21/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU result state
2023-09-26 9:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-27 11:28 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-27 11:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:09:01AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> That starts to get silly. The struct is used only in the microcode realm
> and nothing which is globally visible. ucode is a pretty obvious and
> established shortcut. But so what....
Ok, which prefix do you propose?
"microcode_", "ucode_"?
And I chose "microcode_" a while back and planned on converting stuff
gradually when touching the code and not do solely a renaming patch.
All I'm saying is, we should be consistent.
> > You could do
> >
> > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct microcode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
> >
> > so that the naming is different too.
>
> And that solves what?
I find it somewhat confusing when the variable name is called the same
name as the struct and I try to have the struct names be more expressive
than the variables of the same type.
But not a big deal.
> > No need for "ucode_" prefixes to static functions.
>
> What's the problem with that prefix? The function name clearly says what
> this is doing.
Giving proper prefixes only to the externally visible functions is,
I think, a nice way of showing what is what. The static, internally used
symbols, OTOH, don't need a prefix and when you look at the name, you know
immediately whether it is a static symbol or an externally visible and
potentially used by other things. We do that already for other code,
like global variables, for example.
> Nope, because stop_machine_cpuslocked() does not usefully accumulate
> results from all involved CPUs. But it can return errors related to the
> invocation itself, which is a completely different story.
Ah, I see what you mean:
" * RETURNS:
* -ENOENT if @fn(@arg) was not executed at all because all cpus in
* @cpumask were offline; otherwise, 0 if all executions of @fn
* returned 0, any non zero return value if any returned non zero."
So we have to return 0 here. Oh well.
> That's why ucode_ctrl.result is per CPU and has to be evaluated
> separately.
Right.
> >> + /* Analyze the results */
> >> + for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
> >> + switch (per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.result, cpu)) {
> >> + case UCODE_UPDATED: updated++; break;
> >> + case UCODE_TIMEOUT: timedout++; break;
> >> + case UCODE_OK: siblings++; break;
> >> + default: failed++; break;
> >> + }
> >
> > Align vertically.
>
> Align what?
switch (per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.result, cpu)) {
case UCODE_UPDATED: updated++; break;
case UCODE_TIMEOUT: timedout++; break;
case UCODE_OK: siblings++; break;
default: failed++; break;
But meh, it's ok either way.
> and setup_cpus() then tells what?
See above. I think there's a merit in distinguishing the symbol scope
based on the naming only but I'm sure you have an opinion... :-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 22/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU control field
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (20 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 21/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU result state Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-24 6:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions Thomas Gleixner
` (9 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Add a per CPU control field to ucode_ctrl and define constants for it:
SCTRL_WAIT indicates that the CPU needs to spinwait with timeout
SCTRL_APPLY indicates that the CPU needs to invoke the microcode_apply()
callback
SCTRL_DONE indicates that the CPU can proceed without invoking the
microcode_apply() callback.
In theory this could be a global control field, but a global control does
not cover the following case:
15 primary CPUs load microcode successfully
1 primary CPU fails and returns with an error code
With global control the sibling of the failed CPU would either try again or
the whole operation would be aborted with the consequence that the 15
siblings do not invoke the apply path and end up with inconsistent software
state. The result in dmesg would be inconsistent too.
There are two additional fields added and initialized:
ctrl_cpu and secondaries. ctrl_cpu is the CPU number of the primary thread
for now, but with the upcoming uniform loading at package or system scope
this will be one CPU per package or just one CPU. Secondaries hands the
control CPU a CPU mask which will be required to release the secondary CPUs
out of the wait loop.
Preparatory change for implementing a properly split control flow for
primary and secondary CPUs.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -324,8 +324,16 @@ static struct platform_device *microcode
* requirement can be relaxed in the future. Right now, this is conservative
* and good.
*/
+enum sibling_ctrl {
+ SCTRL_WAIT,
+ SCTRL_APPLY,
+ SCTRL_DONE,
+};
+
struct ucode_ctrl {
+ enum sibling_ctrl ctrl;
enum ucode_state result;
+ unsigned int ctrl_cpu;
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
@@ -468,7 +476,7 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
*/
static bool ucode_setup_cpus(void)
{
- struct ucode_ctrl ctrl = { .result = -1, };
+ struct ucode_ctrl ctrl = { .ctrl = SCTRL_WAIT, .result = -1, };
unsigned int cpu;
for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
@@ -478,7 +486,15 @@ static bool ucode_setup_cpus(void)
return false;
}
}
- /* Initialize the per CPU state */
+
+ /*
+ * Initialize the per CPU state. This is core scope for now,
+ * but prepared to take package or system scope into account.
+ */
+ if (topology_is_primary_thread(cpu))
+ ctrl.ctrl_cpu = cpu;
+ else
+ ctrl.ctrl_cpu = cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu));
per_cpu(ucode_ctrl, cpu) = ctrl;
}
return true;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 22/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU control field
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 22/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU control field Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-24 6:47 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-24 6:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:18AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> Add a per CPU control field to ucode_ctrl and define constants for it:
>
> SCTRL_WAIT indicates that the CPU needs to spinwait with timeout
> SCTRL_APPLY indicates that the CPU needs to invoke the microcode_apply()
> callback
> SCTRL_DONE indicates that the CPU can proceed without invoking the
> microcode_apply() callback.
Can we put those explanations over the enum definition pls?
Also, s/indicates that //g when you do.
> In theory this could be a global control field, but a global control does
> not cover the following case:
>
> 15 primary CPUs load microcode successfully
> 1 primary CPU fails and returns with an error code
>
> With global control the sibling of the failed CPU would either try again or
> the whole operation would be aborted with the consequence that the 15
> siblings do not invoke the apply path and end up with inconsistent software
> state. The result in dmesg would be inconsistent too.
>
> There are two additional fields added and initialized:
>
> ctrl_cpu and secondaries. ctrl_cpu is the CPU number of the primary thread
> for now, but with the upcoming uniform loading at package or system scope
> this will be one CPU per package or just one CPU. Secondaries hands the
> control CPU a CPU mask which will be required to release the secondary CPUs
> out of the wait loop.
Also as a comment above their definitions pls.
> Preparatory change for implementing a properly split control flow for
> primary and secondary CPUs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> ---
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
> @@ -324,8 +324,16 @@ static struct platform_device *microcode
> * requirement can be relaxed in the future. Right now, this is conservative
> * and good.
> */
> +enum sibling_ctrl {
> + SCTRL_WAIT,
> + SCTRL_APPLY,
> + SCTRL_DONE,
> +};
> +
> struct ucode_ctrl {
> + enum sibling_ctrl ctrl;
> enum ucode_state result;
> + unsigned int ctrl_cpu;
> };
>
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
> @@ -468,7 +476,7 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
> */
> static bool ucode_setup_cpus(void)
> {
> - struct ucode_ctrl ctrl = { .result = -1, };
> + struct ucode_ctrl ctrl = { .ctrl = SCTRL_WAIT, .result = -1, };
> unsigned int cpu;
>
> for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
> @@ -478,7 +486,15 @@ static bool ucode_setup_cpus(void)
> return false;
> }
> }
> - /* Initialize the per CPU state */
> +
> + /*
> + * Initialize the per CPU state. This is core scope for now,
> + * but prepared to take package or system scope into account.
> + */
> + if (topology_is_primary_thread(cpu))
> + ctrl.ctrl_cpu = cpu;
> + else
> + ctrl.ctrl_cpu = cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu));
<---- newline here.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (21 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 22/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU control field Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-24 6:58 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 24/30] x86/microcode: Replace the all in one rendevouz handler Thomas Gleixner
` (8 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
The current all in one code is unreadable and really not suited for adding
future features like uniform loading with package or system scope.
Provide a set of new control functions which split the handling of the
primary and secondary CPUs. These will replace the current rendevouz all in
one function in the next step. This is intentionally a separate change
because diff makes an complete unreadable mess otherwise.
So the flow separates the primary and the secondary CPUs into their own
functions, which use the control field in the per CPU ucode_ctrl struct.
primary() secondary()
wait_for_all() wait_for_all()
apply_ucode() wait_for_release()
release() apply_ucode()
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 86 insertions(+)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -357,6 +357,92 @@ static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
return false;
}
+static bool wait_for_ctrl(void)
+{
+ unsigned int timeout;
+
+ for (timeout = 0; timeout < USEC_PER_SEC; timeout++) {
+ if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl) != SCTRL_WAIT)
+ return true;
+ udelay(1);
+ if (!(timeout % 1000))
+ touch_nmi_watchdog();
+ }
+ return false;
+}
+
+static __maybe_unused void ucode_load_secondary(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ unsigned int ctrl_cpu = this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu);
+ enum ucode_state ret;
+
+ /* Initial rendevouz to ensure that all CPUs have arrived */
+ if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
+ pr_err_once("Microcode load: %d CPUs timed out\n",
+ atomic_read(&late_cpus_in) - 1);
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Wait for primary threads to complete. If one of them hangs due
+ * to the update, there is no way out. This is non-recoverable
+ * because the CPU might hold locks or resources and confuse the
+ * scheduler, watchdogs etc. There is no way to safely evacuate the
+ * machine.
+ */
+ if (!wait_for_ctrl())
+ panic("Microcode load: Primary CPU %d timed out\n", ctrl_cpu);
+
+ /*
+ * If the primary succeeded then invoke the apply() callback,
+ * otherwise copy the state from the primary thread.
+ */
+ if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl) == SCTRL_APPLY)
+ ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
+ else
+ ret = per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.result, ctrl_cpu);
+
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, SCTRL_DONE);
+}
+
+static __maybe_unused void ucode_load_primary(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ struct cpumask *secondaries = topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu);
+ enum sibling_ctrl ctrl;
+ enum ucode_state ret;
+ unsigned int sibling;
+
+ /* Initial rendevouz to ensure that all CPUs have arrived */
+ if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
+ pr_err_once("Microcode load: %d CPUs timed out\n",
+ atomic_read(&late_cpus_in) - 1);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, SCTRL_DONE);
+
+ /*
+ * If the update was successful, let the siblings run the apply()
+ * callback. If not, tell them it's done. This also covers the
+ * case where the CPU has uniform loading at package or system
+ * scope implemented but does not advertise it.
+ */
+ if (ret == UCODE_UPDATED || ret == UCODE_OK)
+ ctrl = SCTRL_APPLY;
+ else
+ ctrl = SCTRL_DONE;
+
+ for_each_cpu(sibling, secondaries) {
+ if (sibling != cpu)
+ per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, sibling) = ctrl;
+ }
+}
+
static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
{
int cpu = smp_processor_id();
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-24 6:58 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-26 9:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-24 6:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> The current all in one code is unreadable and really not suited for adding
> future features like uniform loading with package or system scope.
>
> Provide a set of new control functions which split the handling of the
> primary and secondary CPUs. These will replace the current rendevouz all in
rendezvous
In the comments below too.
> one function in the next step. This is intentionally a separate change
> because diff makes an complete unreadable mess otherwise.
>
> So the flow separates the primary and the secondary CPUs into their own
> functions, which use the control field in the per CPU ucode_ctrl struct.
>
> primary() secondary()
> wait_for_all() wait_for_all()
> apply_ucode() wait_for_release()
> release() apply_ucode()
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 86 insertions(+)
> ---
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
> @@ -357,6 +357,92 @@ static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
> return false;
> }
>
> +static bool wait_for_ctrl(void)
> +{
> + unsigned int timeout;
> +
> + for (timeout = 0; timeout < USEC_PER_SEC; timeout++) {
> + if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl) != SCTRL_WAIT)
> + return true;
> + udelay(1);
> + if (!(timeout % 1000))
> + touch_nmi_watchdog();
> + }
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +static __maybe_unused void ucode_load_secondary(unsigned int cpu)
s/ucode_//
ucode_load_primary() too.
> +{
> + unsigned int ctrl_cpu = this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu);
> + enum ucode_state ret;
> +
> + /* Initial rendevouz to ensure that all CPUs have arrived */
> + if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
> + pr_err_once("Microcode load: %d CPUs timed out\n",
Make that look like "microcode: Late loading: ..."
And I think we should use "Late loading" or similar prefix for all those
operations here so that it is easily greppable in the logs.
> + atomic_read(&late_cpus_in) - 1);
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Wait for primary threads to complete. If one of them hangs due
> + * to the update, there is no way out. This is non-recoverable
> + * because the CPU might hold locks or resources and confuse the
> + * scheduler, watchdogs etc. There is no way to safely evacuate the
> + * machine.
> + */
> + if (!wait_for_ctrl())
> + panic("Microcode load: Primary CPU %d timed out\n", ctrl_cpu);
> +
> + /*
> + * If the primary succeeded then invoke the apply() callback,
> + * otherwise copy the state from the primary thread.
> + */
> + if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl) == SCTRL_APPLY)
> + ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
> + else
> + ret = per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.result, ctrl_cpu);
> +
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, SCTRL_DONE);
> +}
> +
> +static __maybe_unused void ucode_load_primary(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> + struct cpumask *secondaries = topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu);
> + enum sibling_ctrl ctrl;
> + enum ucode_state ret;
> + unsigned int sibling;
> +
> + /* Initial rendevouz to ensure that all CPUs have arrived */
> + if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
> + pr_err_once("Microcode load: %d CPUs timed out\n",
> + atomic_read(&late_cpus_in) - 1);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, SCTRL_DONE);
Do that update...
> +
> + /*
> + * If the update was successful, let the siblings run the apply()
> + * callback. If not, tell them it's done. This also covers the
> + * case where the CPU has uniform loading at package or system
> + * scope implemented but does not advertise it.
> + */
> + if (ret == UCODE_UPDATED || ret == UCODE_OK)
> + ctrl = SCTRL_APPLY;
> + else
> + ctrl = SCTRL_DONE;
... here, after having checked ret.
> +
> + for_each_cpu(sibling, secondaries) {
> + if (sibling != cpu)
> + per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, sibling) = ctrl;
> + }
> +}
> +
> static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
> {
> int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions
2023-09-24 6:58 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-09-26 9:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-27 11:50 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-26 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Sun, Sep 24 2023 at 08:58, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> +
>> + ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
>> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
>> + this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, SCTRL_DONE);
>
> Do that update...
>
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * If the update was successful, let the siblings run the apply()
>> + * callback. If not, tell them it's done. This also covers the
>> + * case where the CPU has uniform loading at package or system
>> + * scope implemented but does not advertise it.
>> + */
>> + if (ret == UCODE_UPDATED || ret == UCODE_OK)
>> + ctrl = SCTRL_APPLY;
>> + else
>> + ctrl = SCTRL_DONE;
>
> ... here, after having checked ret.
No. That's two different things. The write above stores the information
fir the current CPU, while this conditional constructs the command for
the siblings.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions
2023-09-26 9:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-27 11:50 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-27 11:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:42:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> No. That's two different things. The write above stores the information
> fir the current CPU, while this conditional constructs the command for
> the siblings.
Aha, I was simply pointing out that you're not checking whether the
primary got updated but writing unconditionally SCTRL_DONE for it but
you check ret to know what to do for the *secondaries*.
The actual check whether the primary got updated is the
ucode_ctrl.result check later.
Yeah, that's ok.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 24/30] x86/microcode: Replace the all in one rendevouz handler
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (22 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-27 16:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 25/30] x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMI Thomas Gleixner
` (7 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
with a new handler which just separates the control flow of primary and
secondary CPUs.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 51 ++++++-----------------------------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ struct ucode_ctrl {
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
-static atomic_t late_cpus_in, late_cpus_out;
+static atomic_t late_cpus_in;
static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
{
@@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ static bool wait_for_ctrl(void)
return false;
}
-static __maybe_unused void ucode_load_secondary(unsigned int cpu)
+static void ucode_load_secondary(unsigned int cpu)
{
unsigned int ctrl_cpu = this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu);
enum ucode_state ret;
@@ -407,7 +407,7 @@ static __maybe_unused void ucode_load_se
this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, SCTRL_DONE);
}
-static __maybe_unused void ucode_load_primary(unsigned int cpu)
+static void ucode_load_primary(unsigned int cpu)
{
struct cpumask *secondaries = topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu);
enum sibling_ctrl ctrl;
@@ -445,46 +445,14 @@ static __maybe_unused void ucode_load_pr
static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
{
- int cpu = smp_processor_id();
- enum ucode_state ret;
-
- /*
- * Wait for all CPUs to arrive. A load will not be attempted unless all
- * CPUs show up.
- * */
- if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
- this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
- return 0;
- }
-
- /*
- * On an SMT system, it suffices to load the microcode on one sibling of
- * the core because the microcode engine is shared between the threads.
- * Synchronization still needs to take place so that no concurrent
- * loading attempts happen on multiple threads of an SMT core. See
- * below.
- */
- if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) != cpu)
- goto wait_for_siblings;
+ unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
- ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
- this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
-
-wait_for_siblings:
- if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_out))
- panic("Timeout during microcode update!\n");
-
- /*
- * At least one thread has completed update on each core.
- * For others, simply call the update to make sure the
- * per-cpu cpuinfo can be updated with right microcode
- * revision.
- */
- if (cpumask_first(topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu)) == cpu)
- return 0;
+ if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu) == cpu)
+ ucode_load_primary(cpu);
+ else
+ ucode_load_secondary(cpu);
- ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
- this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
+ /* No point to wait here. The CPUs will all wait in stop_machine(). */
return 0;
}
@@ -498,7 +466,6 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
pr_err("You should switch to early loading, if possible.\n");
atomic_set(&late_cpus_in, num_online_cpus());
- atomic_set(&late_cpus_out, num_online_cpus());
/*
* Take a snapshot before the microcode update in order to compare and
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 24/30] x86/microcode: Replace the all in one rendevouz handler
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 24/30] x86/microcode: Replace the all in one rendevouz handler Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-27 16:47 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-27 16:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> - ret = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
> - this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
> + /* No point to wait here. The CPUs will all wait in stop_machine(). */
Niice.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 25/30] x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMI
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (23 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 24/30] x86/microcode: Replace the all in one rendevouz handler Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-27 17:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 26/30] x86/microcode: Protect against instrumentation Thomas Gleixner
` (6 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
stop_machine() does not prevent the spin-waiting sibling from handling an
NMI, which is obviously violating the whole concept of rendezvous.
Implement a static branch right in the beginning of the NMI handler which
is NOOPed except when enabled by the late loading mechanism.
The later loader enables the static branch before stop_machine() is
invoked. Each CPU has an nmi_enable in its control structure which
indicates whether the CPU should go into the update routine.
This is required to bridge the gap between enabling the branch and actually
being at the point where it makes sense.
Each CPU which arrives in the stopper thread function sets that flag and
issues a self NMI right after that. If the NMI function sees the flag
clear, it returns. If it's set it clears the flag and enters the rendezvous.
This is safe against a real NMI which hits in between setting the flag and
sending the NMI to itself. The real NMI will be swallowed by the microcode
update and the self NMI will then let stuff continue. Otherwise this would
end up with a spurious NMI.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h | 12 ++++++++
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 1
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 3 +-
arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c | 4 ++
5 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
@@ -70,4 +70,16 @@ static inline u32 intel_get_microcode_re
}
#endif /* !CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL */
+bool microcode_nmi_handler(void);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE_LATE_LOADING
+DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(microcode_nmi_handler_enable);
+static __always_inline bool microcode_nmi_handler_enabled(void)
+{
+ return static_branch_unlikely(µcode_nmi_handler_enable);
+}
+#else
+static __always_inline bool microcode_nmi_handler_enabled(void) { return false; }
+#endif
+
#endif /* _ASM_X86_MICROCODE_H */
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
#include <linux/miscdevice.h>
#include <linux/capability.h>
#include <linux/firmware.h>
+#include <linux/cpumask.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>
#include <linux/mutex.h>
@@ -31,6 +32,7 @@
#include <linux/fs.h>
#include <linux/mm.h>
+#include <asm/apic.h>
#include <asm/cpu_device_id.h>
#include <asm/perf_event.h>
#include <asm/processor.h>
@@ -312,8 +314,10 @@ struct ucode_ctrl {
enum sibling_ctrl ctrl;
enum ucode_state result;
unsigned int ctrl_cpu;
+ bool nmi_enabled;
};
+DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(microcode_nmi_handler_enable);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
static atomic_t late_cpus_in;
@@ -327,7 +331,8 @@ static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
if (!atomic_read(cnt))
return true;
udelay(1);
- if (!(timeout % 1000))
+ /* If invoked directly, tickle the NMI watchdog */
+ if (!microcode_ops->use_nmi && !(timeout % 1000))
touch_nmi_watchdog();
}
/* Prevent the late comers to make progress and let them time out */
@@ -343,7 +348,8 @@ static bool wait_for_ctrl(void)
if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl) != SCTRL_WAIT)
return true;
udelay(1);
- if (!(timeout % 1000))
+ /* If invoked directly, tickle the NMI watchdog */
+ if (!microcode_ops->use_nmi && !(timeout % 1000))
touch_nmi_watchdog();
}
return false;
@@ -421,7 +427,7 @@ static void ucode_load_primary(unsigned
}
}
-static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
+static bool microcode_update_handler(void)
{
unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
@@ -430,7 +436,29 @@ static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void
else
ucode_load_secondary(cpu);
- /* No point to wait here. The CPUs will all wait in stop_machine(). */
+ touch_nmi_watchdog();
+ return true;
+}
+
+bool microcode_nmi_handler(void)
+{
+ if (!this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled))
+ return false;
+
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled, false);
+ return microcode_update_handler();
+}
+
+static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
+{
+ if (microcode_ops->use_nmi) {
+ /* Enable the NMI handler and raise NMI */
+ this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled, true);
+ apic->send_IPI(smp_processor_id(), NMI_VECTOR);
+ } else {
+ /* Just invoke the handler directly */
+ microcode_update_handler();
+ }
return 0;
}
@@ -451,8 +479,14 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
*/
store_cpu_caps(&prev_info);
+ if (microcode_ops->use_nmi)
+ static_branch_enable_cpuslocked(µcode_nmi_handler_enable);
+
stop_machine_cpuslocked(ucode_load_cpus_stopped, NULL, cpu_online_mask);
+ if (microcode_ops->use_nmi)
+ static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(µcode_nmi_handler_enable);
+
/* Analyze the results */
for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
switch (per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.result, cpu)) {
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -601,6 +601,7 @@ static struct microcode_ops microcode_in
.collect_cpu_info = collect_cpu_info,
.apply_microcode = apply_microcode_late,
.finalize_late_load = finalize_late_load,
+ .use_nmi = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64),
};
static __init void calc_llc_size_per_core(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ struct microcode_ops {
enum ucode_state (*apply_microcode)(int cpu);
int (*collect_cpu_info)(int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
void (*finalize_late_load)(int result);
- unsigned int nmi_safe : 1;
+ unsigned int nmi_safe : 1,
+ use_nmi : 1;
};
extern struct ucode_cpu_info ucode_cpu_info[];
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
#include <asm/reboot.h>
#include <asm/cache.h>
#include <asm/nospec-branch.h>
+#include <asm/microcode.h>
#include <asm/sev.h>
#define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
@@ -343,6 +344,9 @@ static noinstr void default_do_nmi(struc
instrumentation_begin();
+ if (microcode_nmi_handler_enabled() && microcode_nmi_handler())
+ goto out;
+
handled = nmi_handle(NMI_LOCAL, regs);
__this_cpu_add(nmi_stats.normal, handled);
if (handled) {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 25/30] x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMI
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 25/30] x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMI Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-27 17:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-28 9:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-27 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:23AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> stop_machine() does not prevent the spin-waiting sibling from handling an
> NMI, which is obviously violating the whole concept of rendezvous.
>
> Implement a static branch right in the beginning of the NMI handler which
> is NOOPed except when enabled by the late loading mechanism.
>
> The later loader enables the static branch before stop_machine() is
s/later/late/
> invoked. Each CPU has an nmi_enable in its control structure which
> indicates whether the CPU should go into the update routine.
>
> This is required to bridge the gap between enabling the branch and actually
> being at the point where it makes sense.
Huh? "where it makes sense"?
> -static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
> +static bool microcode_update_handler(void)
> {
> unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>
> @@ -430,7 +436,29 @@ static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void
> else
> ucode_load_secondary(cpu);
>
> - /* No point to wait here. The CPUs will all wait in stop_machine(). */
> + touch_nmi_watchdog();
AFAICT, you're touching the NMI watchdog even in the !use_nmi case.
> + return true;
> +}
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 25/30] x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMI
2023-09-27 17:17 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-09-28 9:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-28 9:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Wed, Sep 27 2023 at 19:17, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:23AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>> - /* No point to wait here. The CPUs will all wait in stop_machine(). */
>> + touch_nmi_watchdog();
>
> AFAICT, you're touching the NMI watchdog even in the !use_nmi case.
Yes, we need that also for the non-NMI case because this runs in
stop-machine.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 26/30] x86/microcode: Protect against instrumentation
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (24 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 25/30] x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMI Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-28 10:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 27/30] x86/apic: Provide apic_force_nmi_on_cpu() Thomas Gleixner
` (5 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
The wait for control loop in which the siblings are waiting for the
microcode update on the primary thread must be protected against
instrumentation as instrumentation can end up in #INT3, #DB or #PF, which
then returns with IRET. That IRET reenables NMI which is the opposite of
what the NMI rendezvouz is trying to achieve.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 84 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -319,53 +319,65 @@ struct ucode_ctrl {
DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(microcode_nmi_handler_enable);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
+static unsigned int loops_per_usec;
static atomic_t late_cpus_in;
-static bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
+static noinstr bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
{
- unsigned int timeout;
+ unsigned int timeout, loops;
- WARN_ON_ONCE(atomic_dec_return(cnt) < 0);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(raw_atomic_dec_return(cnt) < 0);
for (timeout = 0; timeout < USEC_PER_SEC; timeout++) {
- if (!atomic_read(cnt))
+ if (!raw_atomic_read(cnt))
return true;
- udelay(1);
+
+ for (loops = 0; loops < loops_per_usec; loops++)
+ cpu_relax();
+
/* If invoked directly, tickle the NMI watchdog */
- if (!microcode_ops->use_nmi && !(timeout % 1000))
+ if (!microcode_ops->use_nmi && !(timeout % 1000)) {
+ instrumentation_begin();
touch_nmi_watchdog();
+ instrumentation_end();
+ }
}
/* Prevent the late comers to make progress and let them time out */
- atomic_inc(cnt);
+ raw_atomic_inc(cnt);
return false;
}
-static bool wait_for_ctrl(void)
+static noinstr bool wait_for_ctrl(void)
{
- unsigned int timeout;
+ unsigned int timeout, loops;
for (timeout = 0; timeout < USEC_PER_SEC; timeout++) {
- if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl) != SCTRL_WAIT)
+ if (raw_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl) != SCTRL_WAIT)
return true;
- udelay(1);
+
+ for (loops = 0; loops < loops_per_usec; loops++)
+ cpu_relax();
+
/* If invoked directly, tickle the NMI watchdog */
- if (!microcode_ops->use_nmi && !(timeout % 1000))
+ if (!microcode_ops->use_nmi && !(timeout % 1000)) {
+ instrumentation_begin();
touch_nmi_watchdog();
+ instrumentation_end();
+ }
}
return false;
}
-static void ucode_load_secondary(unsigned int cpu)
+/*
+ * Protected against instrumentation up to the point where the primary
+ * thread completed the update. See microcode_nmi_handler() for details.
+ */
+static noinstr bool ucode_load_secondary_wait(unsigned int ctrl_cpu)
{
- unsigned int ctrl_cpu = this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu);
- enum ucode_state ret;
-
/* Initial rendevouz to ensure that all CPUs have arrived */
if (!wait_for_cpus(&late_cpus_in)) {
- pr_err_once("Microcode load: %d CPUs timed out\n",
- atomic_read(&late_cpus_in) - 1);
this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_TIMEOUT);
- return;
+ return false;
}
/*
@@ -375,9 +387,33 @@ static void ucode_load_secondary(unsigne
* scheduler, watchdogs etc. There is no way to safely evacuate the
* machine.
*/
- if (!wait_for_ctrl())
- panic("Microcode load: Primary CPU %d timed out\n", ctrl_cpu);
+ if (wait_for_ctrl())
+ return true;
+
+ instrumentation_begin();
+ panic("Microcode load: Primary CPU %d timed out\n", ctrl_cpu);
+ instrumentation_end();
+}
+/*
+ * Protected against instrumentation up to the point where the primary
+ * thread completed the update. See microcode_nmi_handler() for details.
+ */
+static noinstr void ucode_load_secondary(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ unsigned int ctrl_cpu = raw_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu);
+ enum ucode_state ret;
+
+ if (!ucode_load_secondary_wait(ctrl_cpu)) {
+ instrumentation_begin();
+ pr_err_once("Microcode load: %d CPUs timed out\n",
+ atomic_read(&late_cpus_in) - 1);
+ instrumentation_end();
+ return;
+ }
+
+ /* Primary thread completed. Allow to invoke instrumentable code */
+ instrumentation_begin();
/*
* If the primary succeeded then invoke the apply() callback,
* otherwise copy the state from the primary thread.
@@ -389,6 +425,7 @@ static void ucode_load_secondary(unsigne
this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, ret);
this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, SCTRL_DONE);
+ instrumentation_end();
}
static void ucode_load_primary(unsigned int cpu)
@@ -427,25 +464,43 @@ static void ucode_load_primary(unsigned
}
}
-static bool microcode_update_handler(void)
+static noinstr bool microcode_update_handler(void)
{
- unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
+ unsigned int cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
- if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu) == cpu)
+ if (raw_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu) == cpu) {
+ instrumentation_begin();
ucode_load_primary(cpu);
- else
+ instrumentation_end();
+ } else {
ucode_load_secondary(cpu);
+ }
+ instrumentation_begin();
touch_nmi_watchdog();
+ instrumentation_end();
+
return true;
}
-bool microcode_nmi_handler(void)
+/*
+ * Protection against instrumentation is required for CPUs which are not
+ * safe against an NMI which is delivered to the secondary SMT sibling
+ * while the primary thread updates the microcode. Instrumentation can end
+ * up in #INT3, #DB and #PF. The IRET from those exceptions reenables NMI
+ * which is the opposite of what the NMI rendevouz is trying to achieve.
+ *
+ * The primary thread is safe versus instrumentation as the actual
+ * microcode update handles this correctly. It's only the sibling code
+ * path which must be NMI safe until the primary thread completed the
+ * update.
+ */
+bool noinstr microcode_nmi_handler(void)
{
- if (!this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled))
+ if (!raw_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled))
return false;
- this_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled, false);
+ raw_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled, false);
return microcode_update_handler();
}
@@ -472,6 +527,7 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
pr_err("You should switch to early loading, if possible.\n");
atomic_set(&late_cpus_in, num_online_cpus());
+ loops_per_usec = loops_per_jiffy / (TICK_NSEC / 1000);
/*
* Take a snapshot before the microcode update in order to compare and
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 26/30] x86/microcode: Protect against instrumentation
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 26/30] x86/microcode: Protect against instrumentation Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-28 10:52 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-28 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:24AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> for (timeout = 0; timeout < USEC_PER_SEC; timeout++) {
> - if (!atomic_read(cnt))
> + if (!raw_atomic_read(cnt))
> return true;
> - udelay(1);
> +
> + for (loops = 0; loops < loops_per_usec; loops++)
> + cpu_relax();
> +
Ah, you're dropping udelay because it is not noinstr...
> @@ -427,25 +464,43 @@ static void ucode_load_primary(unsigned
> }
> }
>
> -static bool microcode_update_handler(void)
> +static noinstr bool microcode_update_handler(void)
> {
> - unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + unsigned int cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
>
> - if (this_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu) == cpu)
> + if (raw_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.ctrl_cpu) == cpu) {
> + instrumentation_begin();
> ucode_load_primary(cpu);
> - else
> + instrumentation_end();
Might as well make the load on the primary noinstr too. I wouldn't lose
any sleep over the late microcode loading code not being traceable.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 27/30] x86/apic: Provide apic_force_nmi_on_cpu()
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (25 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 26/30] x86/microcode: Protect against instrumentation Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 28/30] x86/microcode: Handle "offline" CPUs correctly Thomas Gleixner
` (4 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
When SMT siblings are soft-offlined and parked in one of the play_dead()
variants they still react on NMI, which is problematic on affected Intel
CPUs. The default play_dead() variant uses MWAIT on modern CPUs, which is
not guaranteed to be safe when updated concurrently.
Right now late loading is prevented when not all SMT siblings are online,
but as they still react on NMI, it is possible to bring them out of their
park position into a trivial rendevouz handler.
Provide a function which allows to do that. I does sanity checks whether
the target is in the cpus_booted_once_mask and whether the APIC driver
supports it.
Mark X2APIC and XAPIC as capable, but exclude 32bit and the UV and NUMACHIP
variants as that needs feedback from the relevant experts.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h | 5 ++++-
arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_flat_64.c | 2 ++
arch/x86/kernel/apic/ipi.c | 8 ++++++++
arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_cluster.c | 1 +
arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_phys.c | 1 +
5 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h
@@ -276,7 +276,8 @@ struct apic {
u32 disable_esr : 1,
dest_mode_logical : 1,
- x2apic_set_max_apicid : 1;
+ x2apic_set_max_apicid : 1,
+ nmi_to_offline_cpu : 1;
u32 (*calc_dest_apicid)(unsigned int cpu);
@@ -542,6 +543,8 @@ extern bool default_check_apicid_used(ph
extern void default_ioapic_phys_id_map(physid_mask_t *phys_map, physid_mask_t *retmap);
extern int default_cpu_present_to_apicid(int mps_cpu);
+void apic_send_nmi_to_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu);
+
#else /* CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC */
static inline unsigned int read_apic_id(void) { return 0; }
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_flat_64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_flat_64.c
@@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ static struct apic apic_flat __ro_after_
.send_IPI_allbutself = default_send_IPI_allbutself,
.send_IPI_all = default_send_IPI_all,
.send_IPI_self = default_send_IPI_self,
+ .nmi_to_offline_cpu = true,
.read = native_apic_mem_read,
.write = native_apic_mem_write,
@@ -175,6 +176,7 @@ static struct apic apic_physflat __ro_af
.send_IPI_allbutself = default_send_IPI_allbutself,
.send_IPI_all = default_send_IPI_all,
.send_IPI_self = default_send_IPI_self,
+ .nmi_to_offline_cpu = true,
.read = native_apic_mem_read,
.write = native_apic_mem_write,
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/ipi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/ipi.c
@@ -97,6 +97,14 @@ void native_send_call_func_ipi(const str
__apic_send_IPI_mask(mask, CALL_FUNCTION_VECTOR);
}
+void apic_send_nmi_to_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!apic->nmi_to_offline_cpu))
+ return;
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &cpus_booted_once_mask)))
+ return;
+ apic->send_IPI(cpu, NMI_VECTOR);
+}
#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
static inline int __prepare_ICR2(unsigned int mask)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_cluster.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_cluster.c
@@ -251,6 +251,7 @@ static struct apic apic_x2apic_cluster _
.send_IPI_allbutself = x2apic_send_IPI_allbutself,
.send_IPI_all = x2apic_send_IPI_all,
.send_IPI_self = x2apic_send_IPI_self,
+ .nmi_to_offline_cpu = true,
.read = native_apic_msr_read,
.write = native_apic_msr_write,
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_phys.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_phys.c
@@ -166,6 +166,7 @@ static struct apic apic_x2apic_phys __ro
.send_IPI_allbutself = x2apic_send_IPI_allbutself,
.send_IPI_all = x2apic_send_IPI_all,
.send_IPI_self = x2apic_send_IPI_self,
+ .nmi_to_offline_cpu = true,
.read = native_apic_msr_read,
.write = native_apic_msr_write,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 28/30] x86/microcode: Handle "offline" CPUs correctly
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (26 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 27/30] x86/apic: Provide apic_force_nmi_on_cpu() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 29/30] x86/microcode: Prepare for minimal revision check Thomas Gleixner
` (3 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Offline CPUs need to be parked in a safe loop when microcode update is in
progress on the primary CPU. Currently offline CPUs are parked in
'mwait_play_dead()', and for Intel CPUs, its not a safe instruction, because
'mwait' instruction can be patched in the new microcode update that can
cause instability.
- Adds a new microcode state 'UCODE_OFFLINE' to report status on per-cpu
basis.
- Force NMI on the offline CPUs.
Wakeup offline CPUs while the update is in progress and then return them
back to 'mwait_play_dead()' after microcode update is complete.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h | 1
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 112 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 1
arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c | 5 +
4 files changed, 113 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ static inline u32 intel_get_microcode_re
#endif /* !CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL */
bool microcode_nmi_handler(void);
+void microcode_offline_nmi_handler(void);
#ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE_LATE_LOADING
DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(microcode_nmi_handler_enable);
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -298,8 +298,9 @@ struct ucode_ctrl {
DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(microcode_nmi_handler_enable);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ucode_ctrl, ucode_ctrl);
+static atomic_t late_cpus_in, offline_in_nmi;
static unsigned int loops_per_usec;
-static atomic_t late_cpus_in;
+static cpumask_t cpu_offline_mask;
static noinstr bool wait_for_cpus(atomic_t *cnt)
{
@@ -407,7 +408,7 @@ static noinstr void ucode_load_secondary
instrumentation_end();
}
-static void ucode_load_primary(unsigned int cpu)
+static void __ucode_load_primary(unsigned int cpu)
{
struct cpumask *secondaries = topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu);
enum sibling_ctrl ctrl;
@@ -443,6 +444,67 @@ static void ucode_load_primary(unsigned
}
}
+static bool ucode_kick_offline_cpus(unsigned int nr_offl)
+{
+ unsigned int cpu, timeout;
+
+ for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpu_offline_mask) {
+ /* Enable the rendevouz handler and send NMI */
+ per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled, cpu) = true;
+ apic_send_nmi_to_offline_cpu(cpu);
+ }
+
+ /* Wait for them to arrive */
+ for (timeout = 0; timeout < (USEC_PER_SEC / 2); timeout++) {
+ if (atomic_read(&offline_in_nmi) == nr_offl)
+ return true;
+ udelay(1);
+ }
+ /* Let the others time out */
+ return false;
+}
+
+static void ucode_release_offline_cpus(void)
+{
+ unsigned int cpu;
+
+ for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpu_offline_mask)
+ per_cpu(ucode_ctrl.ctrl, cpu) = SCTRL_DONE;
+}
+
+static void ucode_load_primary(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ unsigned int nr_offl = cpumask_weight(&cpu_offline_mask);
+ bool proceed = true;
+
+ /* Kick soft-offlined SMT siblings if required */
+ if (!cpu && nr_offl)
+ proceed = ucode_kick_offline_cpus(nr_offl);
+
+ /* If the soft-offlined CPUs did not respond, abort */
+ if (proceed)
+ __ucode_load_primary(cpu);
+
+ /* Unconditionally release soft-offlined SMT siblings if required */
+ if (!cpu && nr_offl)
+ ucode_release_offline_cpus();
+}
+
+/*
+ * Minimal stub rendevouz handler for soft-offlined CPUs which participate
+ * in the NMI rendevouz to protect against a concurrent NMI on affected
+ * CPUs.
+ */
+void noinstr microcode_offline_nmi_handler(void)
+{
+ if (!raw_cpu_read(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled))
+ return;
+ raw_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.nmi_enabled, false);
+ raw_cpu_write(ucode_ctrl.result, UCODE_OFFLINE);
+ raw_atomic_inc(&offline_in_nmi);
+ wait_for_ctrl();
+}
+
static noinstr bool microcode_update_handler(void)
{
unsigned int cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
@@ -499,6 +561,7 @@ static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void
static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(void)
{
unsigned int cpu, updated = 0, failed = 0, timedout = 0, siblings = 0;
+ unsigned int nr_offl, offline = 0;
int old_rev = boot_cpu_data.microcode;
struct cpuinfo_x86 prev_info;
@@ -506,6 +569,7 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
pr_err("You should switch to early loading, if possible.\n");
atomic_set(&late_cpus_in, num_online_cpus());
+ atomic_set(&offline_in_nmi, 0);
loops_per_usec = loops_per_jiffy / (TICK_NSEC / 1000);
/*
@@ -528,6 +592,7 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
case UCODE_UPDATED: updated++; break;
case UCODE_TIMEOUT: timedout++; break;
case UCODE_OK: siblings++; break;
+ case UCODE_OFFLINE: offline++; break;
default: failed++; break;
}
}
@@ -539,6 +604,13 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
/* Nothing changed. */
if (!failed && !timedout)
return 0;
+
+ nr_offl = cpumask_weight(&cpu_offline_mask);
+ if (offline < nr_offl) {
+ pr_warn("%u offline siblings did not respond.\n",
+ nr_offl - atomic_read(&offline_in_nmi));
+ return -EIO;
+ }
pr_err("Microcode update failed: %u CPUs failed %u CPUs timed out\n",
failed, timedout);
return -EIO;
@@ -572,19 +644,49 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
* modern CPUs is using MWAIT, which is also not guaranteed to be safe
* against a microcode update which affects MWAIT.
*
- * 2) Initialize the per CPU control structure
+ * As soft-offlined CPUs still react on NMIs, the SMT sibling
+ * restriction can be lifted when the vendor driver signals to use NMI
+ * for rendevouz and the APIC provides a mechanism to send an NMI to a
+ * soft-offlined CPU. The soft-offlined CPUs are then able to
+ * participate in the rendezvouz in a trivial stub handler.
+ *
+ * 2) Initialize the per CPU control structure and create a cpumask
+ * which contains "offline"; secondary threads, so they can be handled
+ * correctly by a control CPU.
*/
static bool ucode_setup_cpus(void)
{
struct ucode_ctrl ctrl = { .ctrl = SCTRL_WAIT, .result = -1, };
+ bool allow_smt_offline;
unsigned int cpu;
+ allow_smt_offline = microcode_ops->nmi_safe ||
+ (microcode_ops->use_nmi && apic->nmi_to_offline_cpu);
+
+ cpumask_clear(&cpu_offline_mask);
+
for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_present_mask, &cpus_booted_once_mask) {
+ /*
+ * Offline CPUs sit in one of the play_dead() functions
+ * with interrupts disabled, but they still react on NMIs
+ * and execute arbitrary code. Also MWAIT being updated
+ * while the offline CPU sits there is not necessarily safe
+ * on all CPU variants.
+ *
+ * Mark them in the offline_cpus mask which will be handled
+ * by CPU0 later in the update process.
+ *
+ * Ensure that the primary thread is online so that it is
+ * guaranteed that all cores are updated.
+ */
if (!cpu_online(cpu)) {
- if (topology_is_primary_thread(cpu) || !microcode_ops->nmi_safe) {
- pr_err("CPU %u not online\n", cpu);
+ if (topology_is_primary_thread(cpu) || !allow_smt_offline) {
+ pr_err("CPU %u not online, loading aborted\n", cpu);
return false;
}
+ cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &cpu_offline_mask);
+ per_cpu(ucode_ctrl, cpu) = ctrl;
+ continue;
}
/*
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ enum ucode_state {
UCODE_NFOUND,
UCODE_ERROR,
UCODE_TIMEOUT,
+ UCODE_OFFLINE,
};
struct microcode_ops {
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
@@ -502,8 +502,11 @@ DEFINE_IDTENTRY_RAW(exc_nmi)
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NMI_CHECK_CPU))
raw_atomic_long_inc(&nsp->idt_calls);
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP) && arch_cpu_is_offline(smp_processor_id()))
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP) && arch_cpu_is_offline(smp_processor_id())) {
+ if (microcode_nmi_handler_enabled())
+ microcode_offline_nmi_handler();
return;
+ }
if (this_cpu_read(nmi_state) != NMI_NOT_RUNNING) {
this_cpu_write(nmi_state, NMI_LATCHED);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* [patch V3 29/30] x86/microcode: Prepare for minimal revision check
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (27 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 28/30] x86/microcode: Handle "offline" CPUs correctly Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-28 11:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 30/30] x86/microcode/intel: Add a minimum required revision for late-loads Thomas Gleixner
` (2 subsequent siblings)
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Applying microcode late can be fatal for the running kernel when the update
changes functionality which is in use already in a non-compatible way,
e.g. by removing a CPUID bit.
There is no way for admins which do not have access to the vendors deep
technical support to decide whether late loading of such a microcode is
safe or not.
Intel has added a new field to the microcode header which tells the minimal
microcode revision which is required to be active in the CPU in order to be
safe.
Provide infrastructure for handling this in the core code and a command
line switch which allows to enforce it.
If the update is considered safe the kernel is not tainted and the annoying
warning message not emitted. If it's enforced and the currently loaded
microcode revision is not safe for late loading then the load is aborted.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 5 ++++
arch/x86/Kconfig | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 3 ++
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++------
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 3 ++
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h | 3 ++
6 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
---
--- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
@@ -3275,6 +3275,11 @@
mga= [HW,DRM]
+ microcode.force_minrev= [X86]
+ Format: <bool>
+ Enable or disable the microcode minimal revision
+ enforcement for the runtime microcode loader.
+
min_addr=nn[KMG] [KNL,BOOT,IA-64] All physical memory below this
physical address is ignored.
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -1322,7 +1322,28 @@ config MICROCODE_LATE_LOADING
is a tricky business and should be avoided if possible. Just the sequence
of synchronizing all cores and SMT threads is one fragile dance which does
not guarantee that cores might not softlock after the loading. Therefore,
- use this at your own risk. Late loading taints the kernel too.
+ use this at your own risk. Late loading taints the kernel unless the
+ microcode header indicates that it is safe for late loading via the
+ minimal revision check. This minimal revision check can be enforced on
+ the kernel command line with "microcode.minrev=Y".
+
+config MICROCODE_LATE_FORCE_MINREV
+ bool "Enforce late microcode loading minimal revision check"
+ default n
+ depends on MICROCODE_LATE_LOADING
+ help
+ To prevent that users load microcode late which modifies already
+ in use features, newer microcodes have a minimum revision field
+ in the microcode header, which tells the kernel which minimum
+ revision must be active in the CPU to safely load that new microcode
+ late into the running system. If disabled the check will not
+ be enforced but the kernel will be tainted when the minimal
+ revision check fails.
+
+ This minimal revision check can also be controlled via the
+ "microcode.minrev" parameter on the kernel command line.
+
+ If unsure say Y.
config X86_MSR
tristate "/dev/cpu/*/msr - Model-specific register support"
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -900,6 +900,9 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcod
enum ucode_state ret = UCODE_NFOUND;
const struct firmware *fw;
+ if (force_minrev)
+ return UCODE_NFOUND;
+
if (c->x86 >= 0x15)
snprintf(fw_name, sizeof(fw_name), "amd-ucode/microcode_amd_fam%.2xh.bin", c->x86);
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -46,6 +46,9 @@
static struct microcode_ops *microcode_ops;
static bool dis_ucode_ldr = true;
+bool force_minrev = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MICROCODE_LATE_FORCE_MINREV);
+module_param(force_minrev, bool, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR);
+
bool initrd_gone;
/*
@@ -558,15 +561,17 @@ static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void
return 0;
}
-static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(void)
+static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(bool is_safe)
{
unsigned int cpu, updated = 0, failed = 0, timedout = 0, siblings = 0;
unsigned int nr_offl, offline = 0;
int old_rev = boot_cpu_data.microcode;
struct cpuinfo_x86 prev_info;
- pr_err("Attempting late microcode loading - it is dangerous and taints the kernel.\n");
- pr_err("You should switch to early loading, if possible.\n");
+ if (!is_safe) {
+ pr_err("Late microcode loading without minimal revision check.\n");
+ pr_err("You should switch to early loading, if possible.\n");
+ }
atomic_set(&late_cpus_in, num_online_cpus());
atomic_set(&offline_in_nmi, 0);
@@ -616,7 +621,9 @@ static int ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(voi
return -EIO;
}
- add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
+ if (!is_safe || failed || timedout)
+ add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
+
pr_info("Microcode load: updated on %u primary CPUs with %u siblings\n", updated, siblings);
if (failed || timedout) {
pr_err("Microcode load incomplete. %u CPUs timed out or failed\n",
@@ -710,9 +717,17 @@ static int ucode_load_late_locked(void)
return -EBUSY;
ret = microcode_ops->request_microcode_fw(0, µcode_pdev->dev);
- if (ret != UCODE_NEW)
- return ret == UCODE_NFOUND ? -ENOENT : -EBADFD;
- return ucode_load_late_stop_cpus();
+
+ switch (ret) {
+ case UCODE_NEW:
+ case UCODE_NEW_SAFE:
+ break;
+ case UCODE_NFOUND:
+ return -ENOENT;
+ default:
+ return -EBADFD;
+ }
+ return ucode_load_late_stop_cpus(ret == UCODE_NEW_SAFE);
}
static ssize_t reload_store(struct device *dev,
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -470,6 +470,9 @@ static enum ucode_state read_ucode_intel
unsigned int curr_mc_size = 0;
u8 *new_mc = NULL, *mc = NULL;
+ if (force_minrev)
+ return UCODE_NFOUND;
+
while (iov_iter_count(iter)) {
struct microcode_header_intel mc_header;
unsigned int mc_size, data_size;
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ struct device;
enum ucode_state {
UCODE_OK = 0,
UCODE_NEW,
+ UCODE_NEW_SAFE,
UCODE_UPDATED,
UCODE_NFOUND,
UCODE_ERROR,
@@ -36,6 +37,8 @@ struct microcode_ops {
use_nmi : 1;
};
+extern bool force_minrev;
+
extern struct ucode_cpu_info ucode_cpu_info[];
struct cpio_data find_microcode_in_initrd(const char *path);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 29/30] x86/microcode: Prepare for minimal revision check
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 29/30] x86/microcode: Prepare for minimal revision check Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-28 11:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-10-02 9:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-28 11:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:30AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
> @@ -46,6 +46,9 @@
> static struct microcode_ops *microcode_ops;
> static bool dis_ucode_ldr = true;
>
> +bool force_minrev = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MICROCODE_LATE_FORCE_MINREV);
> +module_param(force_minrev, bool, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR);
Yeah, it's not a module anymore.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 29/30] x86/microcode: Prepare for minimal revision check
2023-09-28 11:47 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2023-10-02 9:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-10-02 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Thu, Sep 28 2023 at 13:47, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:30AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
>> @@ -46,6 +46,9 @@
>> static struct microcode_ops *microcode_ops;
>> static bool dis_ucode_ldr = true;
>>
>> +bool force_minrev = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MICROCODE_LATE_FORCE_MINREV);
>> +module_param(force_minrev, bool, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR);
>
> Yeah, it's not a module anymore.
module_param is not restricted to modules. You can utilize it for
builtin code too.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* [patch V3 30/30] x86/microcode/intel: Add a minimum required revision for late-loads
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (28 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 29/30] x86/microcode: Prepare for minimal revision check Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-12 7:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-25 16:20 ` Qiuxu Zhuo
2023-09-25 17:02 ` [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Qiuxu Zhuo
2023-09-28 12:00 ` Borislav Petkov
31 siblings, 1 reply; 71+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2023-09-12 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML
Cc: x86, Borislav Petkov, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven,
Nikolay Borisov, Ashok Raj
From: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
In general users don't have the necessary information to determine whether
late loading of a new microcode version is safe and does not modify
anything which the currently running kernel uses already, e.g. removal of
CPUID bits or behavioural changes of MSRs.
To address this issue, Intel has added a "minimum required version" field
to a previously reserved field in the microcode header. Microcode updates
should only be applied if the current microcode version is equal to, or
greater than this minimum required version.
Thomas made some suggestions on how meta-data in the microcode file could
provide Linux with information to decide if the new microcode is suitable
candidate for late loading. But even the "simpler" option requires a lot of
metadata and corresponding kernel code to parse it, so the final suggestion
was to add the 'minimum required version' field in the header.
When microcode changes visible features, microcode will set the minimum
required version to its own revision which prevents late loading.
Old microcode blobs have the minimum revision field always set to 0, which
indicates that there is no information and the kernel considers it as
unsafe.
This is a pure OS software mechanism. The hardware/firmware ignores this
header field.
For early loading there is no restriction because OS visible features are
enumerated after the early load and therefor a change has no effect.
The check is always enabled, but by default not enforced. It can be
enforced via Kconfig or kernel command line.
If enforced, the kernel refuses to late load microcode with a minium
required version field which is zero or when the currently loaded microcode
revision is smaller than the minimum required revision.
If not enforced the load happens independent of the revision check to stay
compatible with the existing behaviour, but it influences the decision
whether the kernel is tainted or not. If the check signals that the late
load is safe, then the kernel is not tainted.
Early loading is not affected by this.
[ tglx: Massaged changelog and fixed up the implementation ]
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h | 3 +-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
@@ -36,7 +36,8 @@ struct microcode_header_intel {
unsigned int datasize;
unsigned int totalsize;
unsigned int metasize;
- unsigned int reserved[2];
+ unsigned int min_req_ver;
+ unsigned int reserved;
};
struct microcode_intel {
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -463,16 +463,40 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
return ret;
}
+static bool ucode_validate_minrev(struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header)
+{
+ int cur_rev = boot_cpu_data.microcode;
+
+ /*
+ * When late-loading, ensure the header declares a minimum revision
+ * required to perform a late-load. The previously reserved field
+ * is 0 in older microcode blobs.
+ */
+ if (!mc_header->min_req_ver) {
+ pr_info("Unsafe microcode update: Microcode header does not specify a required min version\n");
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Check whether the minimum revision specified in the header is either
+ * greater or equal to the current revision.
+ */
+ if (cur_rev < mc_header->min_req_ver) {
+ pr_info("Unsafe microcode update: Current revision 0x%x too old\n", cur_rev);
+ pr_info("Current should be at 0x%x or higher. Use early loading instead\n", mc_header->min_req_ver);
+ return false;
+ }
+ return true;
+}
+
static enum ucode_state read_ucode_intel(int cpu, struct iov_iter *iter)
{
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
+ bool is_safe, new_is_safe = false;
int cur_rev = uci->cpu_sig.rev;
unsigned int curr_mc_size = 0;
u8 *new_mc = NULL, *mc = NULL;
- if (force_minrev)
- return UCODE_NFOUND;
-
while (iov_iter_count(iter)) {
struct microcode_header_intel mc_header;
unsigned int mc_size, data_size;
@@ -515,9 +539,14 @@ static enum ucode_state read_ucode_intel
if (!intel_find_matching_signature(mc, &uci->cpu_sig))
continue;
+ is_safe = ucode_validate_minrev(&mc_header);
+ if (force_minrev && !is_safe)
+ continue;
+
kvfree(new_mc);
cur_rev = mc_header.rev;
new_mc = mc;
+ new_is_safe = is_safe;
mc = NULL;
}
@@ -529,7 +558,7 @@ static enum ucode_state read_ucode_intel
return UCODE_NFOUND;
ucode_patch_late = (struct microcode_intel *)new_mc;
- return UCODE_NEW;
+ return new_is_safe ? UCODE_NEW_SAFE : UCODE_NEW;
fail:
kvfree(mc);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 30/30] x86/microcode/intel: Add a minimum required revision for late-loads
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 30/30] x86/microcode/intel: Add a minimum required revision for late-loads Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-25 16:20 ` Qiuxu Zhuo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Qiuxu Zhuo @ 2023-09-25 16:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tglx
Cc: arjan, ashok.raj, bp, chang.seok.bae, linux-kernel, nik.borisov,
x86, qiuxu.zhuo
> ...
> From: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
>
> In general users don't have the necessary information to determine whether
> late loading of a new microcode version is safe and does not modify
> anything which the currently running kernel uses already, e.g. removal of
> CPUID bits or behavioural changes of MSRs.
> ...
>
> The check is always enabled, but by default not enforced. It can be
> enforced via Kconfig or kernel command line.
>
> If enforced, the kernel refuses to late load microcode with a minium
s/minium/minimum/
> required version field which is zero or when the currently loaded microcode
> revision is smaller than the minimum required revision.
>
> ...
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -463,16 +463,40 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static bool ucode_validate_minrev(struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header)
> +{
> + int cur_rev = boot_cpu_data.microcode;
> +
> + /*
> + * When late-loading, ensure the header declares a minimum revision
> + * required to perform a late-load. The previously reserved field
> + * is 0 in older microcode blobs.
> + */
> + if (!mc_header->min_req_ver) {
> + pr_info("Unsafe microcode update: Microcode header does not specify a required min version\n");
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Check whether the minimum revision specified in the header is either
> + * greater or equal to the current revision.
> + */
Seems like the above comment doesn't match the following 'if' check.
Perhaps the comment is:
"Check whether the current revision is either greater or
equal to the minimum revision specified in the header."
> + if (cur_rev < mc_header->min_req_ver) {
> + pr_info("Unsafe microcode update: Current revision 0x%x too old\n", cur_rev);
> + pr_info("Current should be at 0x%x or higher. Use early loading instead\n", mc_header->min_req_ver);
> + return false;
> + }
> + return true;
> +}
> ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (29 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 7:58 ` [patch V3 30/30] x86/microcode/intel: Add a minimum required revision for late-loads Thomas Gleixner
@ 2023-09-25 17:02 ` Qiuxu Zhuo
2023-09-28 12:00 ` Borislav Petkov
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Qiuxu Zhuo @ 2023-09-25 17:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tglx; +Cc: arjan, bp, chang.seok.bae, linux-kernel, nik.borisov, x86,
qiuxu.zhuo
Hi Thomas,
> ...
>
> The series is also available from git:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/devel.git ucode-v3
> ...
I tested the 'ucode-v3' code above, and it worked well on my tested machine.
For more details, please refer to the test below:
Tested Machine
--------------
Intel Sapphire Rapids server with 2 sockets, each containing 48 cores,
resulting in a total of 192 threads.
Microcodes
----------
a) Microcode revisison of CPU : 0xab000130
b) Microcode revision in the initramfs : 0xab000140 // for early load
c) Microcode revision in /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/* : 0xab000160 // for late load
[ Microcode b) & c) headers both contain minirev 0x2b0000a1. ]
Test Results
------------
The following test results showed that this 'ucode-v3' worked well for both
early microcode loading and late microcode loading on this tested machine.
Based on the test results:
Tested-by: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>
Dmesg log
---------
// Early load OK.
[ 0.000000] microcode: updated early: 0xab000130 -> 0xab000140, date = 2022-11-04
...
[ 20.216675] microcode: Microcode Update Driver: v2.2.
...
// Late load OK.
[ 199.343654] microcode: Updated to revision 0xab000160, date = 2022-11-16
[ 199.352434] microcode: Microcode load: updated on 96 primary CPUs with 96 siblings
[ 199.361069] microcode: Microcode revision: 0xab000140 -> 0xab000160
...
Thanks!
-Qiuxu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread* Re: [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements
2023-09-12 7:57 [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
` (30 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-25 17:02 ` [patch V3 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Qiuxu Zhuo
@ 2023-09-28 12:00 ` Borislav Petkov
31 siblings, 0 replies; 71+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2023-09-28 12:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: LKML, x86, Chang S. Bae, Arjan van de Ven, Nikolay Borisov
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:57:43AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> This is a follow up on:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230812194003.682298127@linutronix.de
Ok, I've gone through them all. I guess you could send the new revision
so that I can start queueing them.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 71+ messages in thread