From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
james.morse@arm.com, joey.gouly@arm.com, maz@kernel.org,
will@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] arm64: alternatives: make alt_region const
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 10:31:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yx78izHqzRZLlCeA@FVFF77S0Q05N> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXGGF0+of=JBVgrxG=yUN0UwGHuFamXMOa2VQn+Lcice7g@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 05:18:54PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 17:14, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > We never alter a struct alt_region after creation, and we open-code the
> > bounds of the kernel alternatives region in two functions.
> >
> > This patch adds a shared struct alt_region, and marks the alt regions as
> > const to prevent unintentional modification.
> >
>
> What is the point of struct alt_region? Can we just get rid of it
> entirely? It seems its only purpose is to carry a <start, end> tuple
> that could easily be converted into start and end arguments to
> __apply_alternatives().
We could right now, but I'm intending to fix some noinstr issues (and make
debugging easier) by splitting the alternatives sanity-checking & patching into
distinct initcalls (alnog with some extra debug), and having the structure for
the common definition is quite nice to avoid open-coding the start and end
value in a bunch of places.
So I'd prefer to keep it for now, but I can follow up and delete it if the
above doesn't turn out to need it, if that's ok?
Mark.
> > There should be no functional change as a result of this patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> > Cc: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c | 26 ++++++++++++--------------
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c
> > index d94d97cb4a0bf..2e18c9c0f612b 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c
> > @@ -133,8 +133,9 @@ static void clean_dcache_range_nopatch(u64 start, u64 end)
> > } while (cur += d_size, cur < end);
> > }
> >
> > -static void __nocfi __apply_alternatives(struct alt_region *region, bool is_module,
> > - unsigned long *feature_mask)
> > +static void __nocfi __apply_alternatives(const struct alt_region *region,
> > + bool is_module,
> > + unsigned long *feature_mask)
> > {
> > struct alt_instr *alt;
> > __le32 *origptr, *updptr;
> > @@ -190,17 +191,17 @@ static void __nocfi __apply_alternatives(struct alt_region *region, bool is_modu
> > }
> > }
> >
> > +static const struct alt_region kernel_alternatives = {
> > + .begin = (struct alt_instr *)__alt_instructions,
> > + .end = (struct alt_instr *)__alt_instructions_end,
> > +};
> > +
> > /*
> > * We might be patching the stop_machine state machine, so implement a
> > * really simple polling protocol here.
> > */
> > static int __apply_alternatives_multi_stop(void *unused)
> > {
> > - struct alt_region region = {
> > - .begin = (struct alt_instr *)__alt_instructions,
> > - .end = (struct alt_instr *)__alt_instructions_end,
> > - };
> > -
> > /* We always have a CPU 0 at this point (__init) */
> > if (smp_processor_id()) {
> > while (!all_alternatives_applied)
> > @@ -213,7 +214,8 @@ static int __apply_alternatives_multi_stop(void *unused)
> > ARM64_NPATCHABLE);
> >
> > BUG_ON(all_alternatives_applied);
> > - __apply_alternatives(®ion, false, remaining_capabilities);
> > + __apply_alternatives(&kernel_alternatives, false,
> > + remaining_capabilities);
> > /* Barriers provided by the cache flushing */
> > all_alternatives_applied = 1;
> > }
> > @@ -236,17 +238,13 @@ void __init apply_alternatives_all(void)
> > */
> > void __init apply_boot_alternatives(void)
> > {
> > - struct alt_region region = {
> > - .begin = (struct alt_instr *)__alt_instructions,
> > - .end = (struct alt_instr *)__alt_instructions_end,
> > - };
> > -
> > /* If called on non-boot cpu things could go wrong */
> > WARN_ON(smp_processor_id() != 0);
> >
> > pr_info("applying boot alternatives\n");
> >
> > - __apply_alternatives(®ion, false, &boot_capabilities[0]);
> > + __apply_alternatives(&kernel_alternatives, false,
> > + &boot_capabilities[0]);
> > }
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
> > --
> > 2.30.2
> >
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-12 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-01 15:13 [PATCH 0/9] arm64: alternatives: improvements Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 1/9] arm64: cpufeature: make cpus_have_cap() noinstr-safe Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 2/9] arm64: alternatives: kvm: prepare for cap changes Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 3/9] arm64: alternatives: proton-pack: " Mark Rutland
2022-09-02 16:19 ` Joey Gouly
2022-09-05 8:46 ` Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 4/9] arm64: alternatives: hoist print out of __apply_alternatives() Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 5/9] arm64: alternatives: make alt_region const Mark Rutland
2022-09-06 15:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-12 9:31 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2022-09-12 10:13 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-12 12:13 ` Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:14 ` [PATCH 6/9] arm64: alternatives: have callbacks take a cap Mark Rutland
2022-09-02 15:54 ` Joey Gouly
2022-09-05 8:48 ` Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:14 ` [PATCH 7/9] arm64: alternatives: add alternative_has_feature_*() Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:14 ` [PATCH 8/9] arm64: alternatives: add shared NOP callback Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:14 ` [PATCH 9/9] HACK: arm64: alternatives: dump summary of alternatives Mark Rutland
2022-09-12 12:36 ` Mark Brown
2022-09-12 16:14 ` Mark Rutland
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=Yx78izHqzRZLlCeA@FVFF77S0Q05N \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=will@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).