* FAILED: patch "[PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Check patch signature before saving" failed to apply to 4.4-stable tree
@ 2020-11-23 9:46 gregkh
2020-11-23 10:32 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: gregkh @ 2020-11-23 9:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: yu.c.chen, bp; +Cc: stable
The patch below does not apply to the 4.4-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 1a371e67dc77125736cc56d3a0893f06b75855b6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:59:23 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Check patch signature before saving
microcode for early loading
Currently, scan_microcode() leverages microcode_matches() to check
if the microcode matches the CPU by comparing the family and model.
However, the processor stepping and flags of the microcode signature
should also be considered when saving a microcode patch for early
update.
Use find_matching_signature() in scan_microcode() and get rid of the
now-unused microcode_matches() which is a good cleanup in itself.
Complete the verification of the patch being saved for early loading in
save_microcode_patch() directly. This needs to be done there too because
save_mc_for_early() will call save_microcode_patch() too.
The second reason why this needs to be done is because the loader still
tries to support, at least hypothetically, mixed-steppings systems and
thus adds all patches to the cache that belong to the same CPU model
albeit with different steppings.
For example:
microcode: CPU: sig=0x906ec, pf=0x2, rev=0xd6
microcode: mc_saved[0]: sig=0x906e9, pf=0x2a, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
microcode: mc_saved[1]: sig=0x906ea, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19000, date = 2020-04-27
microcode: mc_saved[2]: sig=0x906eb, pf=0x2, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
microcode: mc_saved[3]: sig=0x906ec, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19000, date = 2020-04-27
microcode: mc_saved[4]: sig=0x906ed, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
The patch which is being saved for early loading, however, can only be
the one which fits the CPU this runs on so do the signature verification
before saving.
[ bp: Do signature verification in save_microcode_patch()
and rewrite commit message. ]
Fixes: ec400ddeff20 ("x86/microcode_intel_early.c: Early update ucode on Intel's CPU")
Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208535
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201113015923.13960-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index 6a99535d7f37..7e8e07bddd5f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -100,53 +100,6 @@ static int has_newer_microcode(void *mc, unsigned int csig, int cpf, int new_rev
return find_matching_signature(mc, csig, cpf);
}
-/*
- * Given CPU signature and a microcode patch, this function finds if the
- * microcode patch has matching family and model with the CPU.
- *
- * %true - if there's a match
- * %false - otherwise
- */
-static bool microcode_matches(struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header,
- unsigned long sig)
-{
- unsigned long total_size = get_totalsize(mc_header);
- unsigned long data_size = get_datasize(mc_header);
- struct extended_sigtable *ext_header;
- unsigned int fam_ucode, model_ucode;
- struct extended_signature *ext_sig;
- unsigned int fam, model;
- int ext_sigcount, i;
-
- fam = x86_family(sig);
- model = x86_model(sig);
-
- fam_ucode = x86_family(mc_header->sig);
- model_ucode = x86_model(mc_header->sig);
-
- if (fam == fam_ucode && model == model_ucode)
- return true;
-
- /* Look for ext. headers: */
- if (total_size <= data_size + MC_HEADER_SIZE)
- return false;
-
- ext_header = (void *) mc_header + data_size + MC_HEADER_SIZE;
- ext_sig = (void *)ext_header + EXT_HEADER_SIZE;
- ext_sigcount = ext_header->count;
-
- for (i = 0; i < ext_sigcount; i++) {
- fam_ucode = x86_family(ext_sig->sig);
- model_ucode = x86_model(ext_sig->sig);
-
- if (fam == fam_ucode && model == model_ucode)
- return true;
-
- ext_sig++;
- }
- return false;
-}
-
static struct ucode_patch *memdup_patch(void *data, unsigned int size)
{
struct ucode_patch *p;
@@ -164,7 +117,7 @@ static struct ucode_patch *memdup_patch(void *data, unsigned int size)
return p;
}
-static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size)
+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;
@@ -210,6 +163,9 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size)
if (!p)
return;
+ if (!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
@@ -344,13 +300,14 @@ scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size, struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool save)
size -= mc_size;
- if (!microcode_matches(mc_header, uci->cpu_sig.sig)) {
+ if (!find_matching_signature(data, uci->cpu_sig.sig,
+ uci->cpu_sig.pf)) {
data += mc_size;
continue;
}
if (save) {
- save_microcode_patch(data, mc_size);
+ save_microcode_patch(uci, data, mc_size);
goto next;
}
@@ -483,14 +440,14 @@ static void show_saved_mc(void)
* Save this microcode patch. It will be loaded early when a CPU is
* hot-added or resumes.
*/
-static void save_mc_for_early(u8 *mc, unsigned int size)
+static void save_mc_for_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, u8 *mc, unsigned int size)
{
/* Synchronization during CPU hotplug. */
static DEFINE_MUTEX(x86_cpu_microcode_mutex);
mutex_lock(&x86_cpu_microcode_mutex);
- save_microcode_patch(mc, size);
+ save_microcode_patch(uci, mc, size);
show_saved_mc();
mutex_unlock(&x86_cpu_microcode_mutex);
@@ -935,7 +892,7 @@ static enum ucode_state generic_load_microcode(int cpu, struct iov_iter *iter)
* permanent memory. So it will be loaded early when a CPU is hot added
* or resumes.
*/
- save_mc_for_early(new_mc, new_mc_size);
+ save_mc_for_early(uci, 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);
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Check patch signature before saving" failed to apply to 4.4-stable tree
2020-11-23 9:46 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Check patch signature before saving" failed to apply to 4.4-stable tree gregkh
@ 2020-11-23 10:32 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2020-11-23 10:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gregkh; +Cc: yu.c.chen, stable
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 10:46:01AM +0100, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
>
> The patch below does not apply to the 4.4-stable tree.
> If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
---
From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:59:23 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Check patch signature before saving
microcode for early loading
Commit 1a371e67dc77125736cc56d3a0893f06b75855b6 upstream.
Currently, scan_microcode() leverages microcode_matches() to check
if the microcode matches the CPU by comparing the family and model.
However, the processor stepping and flags of the microcode signature
should also be considered when saving a microcode patch for early
update.
Use find_matching_signature() in scan_microcode() and get rid of the
now-unused microcode_matches() which is a good cleanup in itself.
Complete the verification of the patch being saved for early loading in
save_microcode_patch() directly. This needs to be done there too because
save_mc_for_early() will call save_microcode_patch() too.
The second reason why this needs to be done is because the loader still
tries to support, at least hypothetically, mixed-steppings systems and
thus adds all patches to the cache that belong to the same CPU model
albeit with different steppings.
For example:
microcode: CPU: sig=0x906ec, pf=0x2, rev=0xd6
microcode: mc_saved[0]: sig=0x906e9, pf=0x2a, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
microcode: mc_saved[1]: sig=0x906ea, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19000, date = 2020-04-27
microcode: mc_saved[2]: sig=0x906eb, pf=0x2, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
microcode: mc_saved[3]: sig=0x906ec, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19000, date = 2020-04-27
microcode: mc_saved[4]: sig=0x906ed, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
The patch which is being saved for early loading, however, can only be
the one which fits the CPU this runs on so do the signature verification
before saving.
[ bp: Do signature verification in save_microcode_patch()
and rewrite commit message. ]
Fixes: ec400ddeff20 ("x86/microcode_intel_early.c: Early update ucode on Intel's CPU")
Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208535
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201113015923.13960-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 49 ++-------------------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index 619d69aa81c8..d4c3a30a7b33 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -132,51 +132,6 @@ load_microcode(struct mc_saved_data *mc_saved_data, unsigned long *initrd,
}
}
-/*
- * Given CPU signature and a microcode patch, this function finds if the
- * microcode patch has matching family and model with the CPU.
- */
-static enum ucode_state
-matching_model_microcode(struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header,
- unsigned long sig)
-{
- unsigned int fam, model;
- unsigned int fam_ucode, model_ucode;
- struct extended_sigtable *ext_header;
- unsigned long total_size = get_totalsize(mc_header);
- unsigned long data_size = get_datasize(mc_header);
- int ext_sigcount, i;
- struct extended_signature *ext_sig;
-
- fam = __x86_family(sig);
- model = x86_model(sig);
-
- fam_ucode = __x86_family(mc_header->sig);
- model_ucode = x86_model(mc_header->sig);
-
- if (fam == fam_ucode && model == model_ucode)
- return UCODE_OK;
-
- /* Look for ext. headers: */
- if (total_size <= data_size + MC_HEADER_SIZE)
- return UCODE_NFOUND;
-
- ext_header = (void *) mc_header + data_size + MC_HEADER_SIZE;
- ext_sig = (void *)ext_header + EXT_HEADER_SIZE;
- ext_sigcount = ext_header->count;
-
- for (i = 0; i < ext_sigcount; i++) {
- fam_ucode = __x86_family(ext_sig->sig);
- model_ucode = x86_model(ext_sig->sig);
-
- if (fam == fam_ucode && model == model_ucode)
- return UCODE_OK;
-
- ext_sig++;
- }
- return UCODE_NFOUND;
-}
-
static int
save_microcode(struct mc_saved_data *mc_saved_data,
struct microcode_intel **mc_saved_src,
@@ -321,8 +276,8 @@ get_matching_model_microcode(int cpu, unsigned long start,
* the platform, we need to find and save microcode patches
* with the same family and model as the BSP.
*/
- if (matching_model_microcode(mc_header, uci->cpu_sig.sig) !=
- UCODE_OK) {
+ if (!find_matching_signature(mc_header, uci->cpu_sig.sig,
+ uci->cpu_sig.pf)) {
ucode_ptr += mc_size;
continue;
}
--
2.21.0
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-11-23 10:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-11-23 9:46 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Check patch signature before saving" failed to apply to 4.4-stable tree gregkh
2020-11-23 10:32 ` Borislav Petkov
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).