Re: [PATCH stable v4.9 v2] arm64: entry: Place an SB sequence following an ERET instruction

From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org,
	"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR ARM64 \(KVM/arm64\)"
	<kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH stable v4.9 v2] arm64: entry: Place an SB sequence following an ERET instruction
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 17:03:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200821160316.GE21517@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200807131429.GB664450@kroah.com>

On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 03:14:29PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 01:00:54PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 7/20/2020 11:26 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > > On 7/20/20 6:04 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 12:50:23PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > >>> From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > >>>
> > >>> commit 679db70801da9fda91d26caf13bf5b5ccc74e8e8 upstream
> > >>>
> > >>> Some CPUs can speculate past an ERET instruction and potentially perform
> > >>> speculative accesses to memory before processing the exception return.
> > >>> Since the register state is often controlled by a lower privilege level
> > >>> at the point of an ERET, this could potentially be used as part of a
> > >>> side-channel attack.
> > >>>
> > >>> This patch emits an SB sequence after each ERET so that speculation is
> > >>> held up on exception return.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > >>> [florian: Adjust hyp-entry.S to account for the label
> > >>>  added change to hyp/entry.S]
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
> > >>> ---
> > >>> Changes in v2:
> > >>>
> > >>> - added missing hunk in hyp/entry.S per Will's feedback
> > >>
> > >> What about 4.19.y and 4.14.y trees?  I can't take something for 4.9.y
> > >> and then have a regression if someone moves to a newer release, right?
> > > 
> > > Sure, send you candidates for 4.14 and 4.19.
> > 
> > Greg, did you have a chance to queue those changes for 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19?
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20200720182538.13304-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com/
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20200720182937.14099-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com/
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20200709195034.15185-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com/
> 
> Nope, I was waiting for Will's "ack" for these.

This patch doesn't even build for me (the 'sb' macro is not defined in 4.9),
and I really wonder why we bother backporting it at all. Nobody's ever shown
it to be a problem in practice, and it's clear that this is just being
submitted to tick a box rather than anything else (otherwise it would build,
right?).

So I'm not going to Ack any of them. As with a lot of this side-channel
stuff the cure is far worse than the disease.

Will
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm