From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
x86@kernel.org, Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2023 00:17:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZPj6biwRb30FKTyH@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230822121953.976548391@linutronix.de>
* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> 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.
>
> 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/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 31 +-------
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 40 ++---------
> 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 +--
> 7 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 171 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Frankly, the general principle is that we should run as little Linux kernel
code before paging is enabled as possible.
If a system is so broken that it requires a microcode update before it can
even enable paging is IMO so terminally broken that it should be firmware
patched at the factory (to have a proper microcode), or recalled from the
market. It's not something we should make the kernel more fragile for.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-06 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-22 12:20 [patch 0/2] x86/microcode: Make 32-bit early loading robust and correct Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-22 12:20 ` [patch 1/2] x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enable Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-23 10:16 ` [patch V2 " Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-06 22:17 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2023-09-06 22:18 ` [patch " Ingo Molnar
2023-08-22 12:20 ` [patch 2/2] x86/boot/32: Disable stackprotector and tracing for mk_early_pgtbl_32() Thomas Gleixner
2023-09-06 22:17 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZPj6biwRb30FKTyH@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).