From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
kernel-team@android.com
Subject: [PATCH v4 02/14] arm64: Allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 support
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:50:27 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201124155039.13804-3-will@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201124155039.13804-1-will@kernel.org>
When confronted with a mixture of CPUs, some of which support 32-bit
applications and others which don't, we quite sensibly treat the system
as 64-bit only for userspace and prevent execve() of 32-bit binaries.
Unfortunately, some crazy folks have decided to build systems like this
with the intention of running 32-bit applications, so relax our
sanitisation logic to continue to advertise 32-bit support to userspace
on these systems and track the real 32-bit capable cores in a cpumask
instead. For now, the default behaviour remains but will be tied to
a command-line option in a later patch.
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h | 2 +-
arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 8 ++-
arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 106 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
3 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
index e7d98997c09c..e6f0eb4643a0 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
#define ARM64_ALT_PAN_NOT_UAO 10
#define ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN 11
#define ARM64_WORKAROUND_CAVIUM_27456 12
-#define ARM64_HAS_32BIT_EL0 13
+#define ARM64_HAS_32BIT_EL0_DO_NOT_USE 13
#define ARM64_HARDEN_EL2_VECTORS 14
#define ARM64_HAS_CNP 15
#define ARM64_HAS_NO_FPSIMD 16
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
index 97244d4feca9..f447d313a9c5 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
@@ -604,9 +604,15 @@ static inline bool cpu_supports_mixed_endian_el0(void)
return id_aa64mmfr0_mixed_endian_el0(read_cpuid(ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1));
}
+const struct cpumask *system_32bit_el0_cpumask(void);
+DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0);
+
static inline bool system_supports_32bit_el0(void)
{
- return cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_32BIT_EL0);
+ u64 pfr0 = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1);
+
+ return id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(pfr0) ||
+ static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0);
}
static inline bool system_supports_4kb_granule(void)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
index d4a7e84b1513..bc71a51f1b9c 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -104,6 +104,24 @@ DECLARE_BITMAP(boot_capabilities, ARM64_NPATCHABLE);
bool arm64_use_ng_mappings = false;
EXPORT_SYMBOL(arm64_use_ng_mappings);
+/*
+ * Permit PER_LINUX32 and execve() of 32-bit binaries even if not all CPUs
+ * support it?
+ */
+static bool __read_mostly allow_mismatched_32bit_el0;
+
+/*
+ * Static branch enabled only if allow_mismatched_32bit_el0 is set and we have
+ * seen at least one CPU capable of 32-bit EL0.
+ */
+DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0);
+
+/*
+ * Mask of CPUs supporting 32-bit EL0.
+ * Only valid if arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0 is enabled.
+ */
+static cpumask_var_t cpu_32bit_el0_mask __cpumask_var_read_mostly;
+
/*
* Flag to indicate if we have computed the system wide
* capabilities based on the boot time active CPUs. This
@@ -756,7 +774,7 @@ static void __init sort_ftr_regs(void)
* Any bits that are not covered by an arm64_ftr_bits entry are considered
* RES0 for the system-wide value, and must strictly match.
*/
-static void __init init_cpu_ftr_reg(u32 sys_reg, u64 new)
+static void init_cpu_ftr_reg(u32 sys_reg, u64 new)
{
u64 val = 0;
u64 strict_mask = ~0x0ULL;
@@ -819,7 +837,7 @@ static void __init init_cpu_hwcaps_indirect_list(void)
static void __init setup_boot_cpu_capabilities(void);
-static void __init init_32bit_cpu_features(struct cpuinfo_32bit *info)
+static void init_32bit_cpu_features(struct cpuinfo_32bit *info)
{
init_cpu_ftr_reg(SYS_ID_DFR0_EL1, info->reg_id_dfr0);
init_cpu_ftr_reg(SYS_ID_DFR1_EL1, info->reg_id_dfr1);
@@ -935,6 +953,25 @@ static void relax_cpu_ftr_reg(u32 sys_id, int field)
WARN_ON(!ftrp->width);
}
+static void update_compat_elf_hwcaps(void);
+
+static void update_mismatched_32bit_el0_cpu_features(struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info,
+ struct cpuinfo_arm64 *boot)
+{
+ static bool boot_cpu_32bit_regs_overridden = false;
+
+ if (!allow_mismatched_32bit_el0 || boot_cpu_32bit_regs_overridden)
+ return;
+
+ if (id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(boot->reg_id_aa64pfr0))
+ return;
+
+ boot->aarch32 = info->aarch32;
+ init_32bit_cpu_features(&boot->aarch32);
+ update_compat_elf_hwcaps();
+ boot_cpu_32bit_regs_overridden = true;
+}
+
static int update_32bit_cpu_features(int cpu, struct cpuinfo_32bit *info,
struct cpuinfo_32bit *boot)
{
@@ -1095,6 +1132,7 @@ void update_cpu_features(int cpu,
* (e.g. SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1), so we call it last.
*/
if (id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(info->reg_id_aa64pfr0)) {
+ update_mismatched_32bit_el0_cpu_features(info, boot);
taint |= update_32bit_cpu_features(cpu, &info->aarch32,
&boot->aarch32);
}
@@ -1196,6 +1234,55 @@ has_cpuid_feature(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int scope)
return feature_matches(val, entry);
}
+static int enable_mismatched_32bit_el0(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info = &per_cpu(cpu_data, cpu);
+ bool cpu_32bit = id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(info->reg_id_aa64pfr0);
+
+ if (cpu_32bit) {
+ cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpu_32bit_el0_mask);
+ static_branch_enable_cpuslocked(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0);
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int __init init_32bit_el0_mask(void)
+{
+ if (!allow_mismatched_32bit_el0)
+ return 0;
+
+ if (!zalloc_cpumask_var(&cpu_32bit_el0_mask, GFP_KERNEL))
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ return cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN,
+ "arm64/mismatched_32bit_el0:online",
+ enable_mismatched_32bit_el0, NULL);
+}
+subsys_initcall_sync(init_32bit_el0_mask);
+
+const struct cpumask *system_32bit_el0_cpumask(void)
+{
+ if (!system_supports_32bit_el0())
+ return cpu_none_mask;
+
+ if (static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0))
+ return cpu_32bit_el0_mask;
+
+ return cpu_possible_mask;
+}
+
+static bool has_32bit_el0(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int scope)
+{
+ if (!has_cpuid_feature(entry, scope))
+ return allow_mismatched_32bit_el0;
+
+ if (scope == SCOPE_SYSTEM)
+ pr_info("detected: 32-bit EL0 Support\n");
+
+ return true;
+}
+
static bool has_useable_gicv3_cpuif(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int scope)
{
bool has_sre;
@@ -1803,10 +1890,9 @@ static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities arm64_features[] = {
},
#endif /* CONFIG_ARM64_VHE */
{
- .desc = "32-bit EL0 Support",
- .capability = ARM64_HAS_32BIT_EL0,
+ .capability = ARM64_HAS_32BIT_EL0_DO_NOT_USE,
.type = ARM64_CPUCAP_SYSTEM_FEATURE,
- .matches = has_cpuid_feature,
+ .matches = has_32bit_el0,
.sys_reg = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1,
.sign = FTR_UNSIGNED,
.field_pos = ID_AA64PFR0_EL0_SHIFT,
@@ -2299,7 +2385,7 @@ static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities compat_elf_hwcaps[] = {
{},
};
-static void __init cap_set_elf_hwcap(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *cap)
+static void cap_set_elf_hwcap(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *cap)
{
switch (cap->hwcap_type) {
case CAP_HWCAP:
@@ -2344,7 +2430,7 @@ static bool cpus_have_elf_hwcap(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *cap)
return rc;
}
-static void __init setup_elf_hwcaps(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *hwcaps)
+static void setup_elf_hwcaps(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *hwcaps)
{
/* We support emulation of accesses to CPU ID feature registers */
cpu_set_named_feature(CPUID);
@@ -2353,6 +2439,12 @@ static void __init setup_elf_hwcaps(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *hwcaps)
cap_set_elf_hwcap(hwcaps);
}
+static void update_compat_elf_hwcaps(void)
+{
+ if (system_capabilities_finalized())
+ setup_elf_hwcaps(compat_elf_hwcaps);
+}
+
static void update_cpu_capabilities(u16 scope_mask)
{
int i;
--
2.29.2.454.gaff20da3a2-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-24 15:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-24 15:50 [PATCH v4 00/14] An alternative series for asymmetric AArch32 systems Will Deacon
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 01/14] arm64: cpuinfo: Split AArch32 registers out into a separate struct Will Deacon
2020-11-24 15:50 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2020-11-27 10:25 ` [PATCH v4 02/14] arm64: Allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 support Marc Zyngier
2020-11-27 11:50 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-27 13:09 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-01 16:56 ` Will Deacon
2020-12-02 13:16 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 03/14] KVM: arm64: Kill 32-bit vCPUs on systems with mismatched " Will Deacon
2020-11-27 10:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-11-27 11:53 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-27 17:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-11-27 17:24 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-27 18:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-12-01 16:57 ` Will Deacon
2020-12-02 8:18 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-12-02 17:27 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 04/14] arm64: Kill 32-bit applications scheduled on 64-bit-only CPUs Will Deacon
2020-11-27 13:12 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-01 16:56 ` Will Deacon
2020-12-02 13:52 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-02 17:42 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 05/14] arm64: Advertise CPUs capable of running 32-bit applications in sysfs Will Deacon
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 06/14] arm64: Hook up cmdline parameter to allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon
2020-11-27 13:17 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-01 16:56 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 07/14] sched: Introduce restrict_cpus_allowed_ptr() to limit task CPU affinity Will Deacon
2020-11-27 9:49 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-27 13:19 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-01 16:56 ` Will Deacon
2020-12-02 13:06 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 08/14] arm64: exec: Adjust affinity for compat tasks with mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon
2020-11-27 10:01 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-27 13:23 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-01 16:55 ` Will Deacon
2020-12-02 14:07 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 09/14] cpuset: Don't use the cpu_possible_mask as a last resort for cgroup v1 Will Deacon
2020-11-27 13:32 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-30 17:05 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-30 17:36 ` Quentin Perret
2020-12-01 11:58 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-01 12:37 ` Quentin Perret
2020-12-01 14:11 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-01 15:56 ` Quentin Perret
2020-12-01 22:30 ` Will Deacon
2020-12-02 11:34 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-02 11:33 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 10/14] sched: Introduce arch_task_cpu_possible_mask() to limit fallback rq selection Will Deacon
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 11/14] sched: Reject CPU affinity changes based on arch_task_cpu_possible_mask() Will Deacon
2020-11-27 9:54 ` Quentin Perret
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 12/14] arm64: Prevent offlining first CPU with 32-bit EL0 on mismatched system Will Deacon
2020-11-27 13:41 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-01 22:13 ` Will Deacon
2020-12-02 12:59 ` Qais Yousef
2020-12-02 17:42 ` Will Deacon
2020-12-02 18:08 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 13/14] arm64: Implement arch_task_cpu_possible_mask() Will Deacon
2020-11-27 13:41 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-24 15:50 ` [PATCH v4 14/14] arm64: Remove logic to kill 32-bit tasks on 64-bit-only cores Will Deacon
2020-11-27 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 00/14] An alternative series for asymmetric AArch32 systems Qais Yousef
2020-12-05 20:43 ` Pavel Machek
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=20201124155039.13804-3-will@kernel.org \
--to=will@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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).