Re: [PATCH v8 02/19] arm64: Allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 support
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Date: 2021-06-03 12:37:31
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 05:47:02PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
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. Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> --- arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 8 +- arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 114 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps | 3 +- 3 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h index 338840c00e8e..603bf4160cd6 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h@@ -630,9 +630,15 @@ 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 static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0) || + id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(pfr0); }
Note that read_sanitised_ftr_reg() has to do a bsearch() to find the
arm64_ftr_reg, so this will make system_32bit_el0_cpumask() a fair
amount more expensive than it needs to be.
Can we follow the pattern we have for arm64_ftr_reg_ctrel0, and have a
arm64_ftr_reg_id_aa64pfr0_el1 that we can address directly here?
That said. I reckon this could be much cleaner if we maintained separate
caps:
ARM64_ALL_CPUS_HAVE_32BIT_EL0
ARM64_SOME_CPUS_HAVE_32BIT_EL0
... and allow arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0 to be set dependent on
ARM64_SOME_CPUS_HAVE_32BIT_EL0. With that, this can be simplified to:
static inline bool system_supports_32bit_el0(void)
{
return (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_ALL_CPUS_HAVE_32BIT_EL0)) ||
static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0))
}
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
static inline bool system_supports_4kb_granule(void)diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c index a4db25cd7122..4194a47de62d 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c@@ -107,6 +107,24 @@ 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@@ -767,7 +785,7 @@ 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;@@ -863,7 +881,7 @@ 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);@@ -979,6 +997,22 @@ static void relax_cpu_ftr_reg(u32 sys_id, int field) WARN_ON(!ftrp->width); } +static void update_mismatched_32bit_el0_cpu_features(struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info, + struct cpuinfo_arm64 *boot)
Could we s/update/lazy_init/ here? IIUC this caters for the case where CPU0 doesn't have AArch32 but a secondary does. That, and the naming looks odd in update_cpu_features() when we have: update_mismatched_32bit_el0_cpu_features(...) update_32bit_cpu_features(...);
+{
+ 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);
+ boot_cpu_32bit_regs_overridden = true;
+}
Can't we share this with the boot CPU path if we do:
/*
* Initialize the common AArch32 features on the first CPU with AArch32.
*/
static void lazy_init_32bit_el0_cpu_features(struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info,
struct cpuinfo_arm64 *boot)
{
static bool initialised = false;
if (initialised || !id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(info->reg_id_aa64pfr0))
return;
boot->aarch32 = info->aarch32;
init_32bit_cpu_features(&boot->aarch32);
initiaised = true;
}
... or is the allow_mismatched_32bit_el0 check necessary for late
hotplug?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ static int update_32bit_cpu_features(int cpu, struct cpuinfo_32bit *info, struct cpuinfo_32bit *boot) {@@ -1139,6 +1173,7 @@ 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); }@@ -1251,6 +1286,28 @@ has_cpuid_feature(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int scope) return feature_matches(val, entry); } +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;@@ -1869,10 +1926,9 @@ static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities arm64_features[] = { .cpu_enable = cpu_copy_el2regs, }, { - .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,@@ -2381,7 +2437,7 @@ 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:@@ -2426,7 +2482,7 @@ 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);@@ -2601,7 +2657,7 @@ static void check_early_cpu_features(void) } static void -verify_local_elf_hwcaps(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps) +__verify_local_elf_hwcaps(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps) { for (; caps->matches; caps++)@@ -2612,6 +2668,14 @@ verify_local_elf_hwcaps(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps) } } +static void verify_local_elf_hwcaps(void) +{ + __verify_local_elf_hwcaps(arm64_elf_hwcaps); + + if (id_aa64pfr0_32bit_el0(read_cpuid(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1))) + __verify_local_elf_hwcaps(compat_elf_hwcaps); +} + static void verify_sve_features(void) { u64 safe_zcr = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(SYS_ZCR_EL1);@@ -2676,11 +2740,7 @@ static void verify_local_cpu_capabilities(void) * on all secondary CPUs. */ verify_local_cpu_caps(SCOPE_ALL & ~SCOPE_BOOT_CPU); - - verify_local_elf_hwcaps(arm64_elf_hwcaps); - - if (system_supports_32bit_el0()) - verify_local_elf_hwcaps(compat_elf_hwcaps); + verify_local_elf_hwcaps(); if (system_supports_sve()) verify_sve_features();@@ -2815,6 +2875,34 @@ void __init setup_cpu_features(void) ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN); } +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); + setup_elf_hwcaps(compat_elf_hwcaps); + } + + 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); +}
Shouldn't we clear this on a hot-unplug? Thanks, Mark.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+subsys_initcall_sync(init_32bit_el0_mask); + static void __maybe_unused cpu_enable_cnp(struct arm64_cpu_capabilities const *cap) { cpu_replace_ttbr1(lm_alias(swapper_pg_dir));diff --git a/arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps b/arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps index 21fbdda7086e..49305c2e6dfd 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps +++ b/arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps@@ -3,7 +3,8 @@ # Internal CPU capabilities constants, keep this list sorted BTI -HAS_32BIT_EL0 +# Unreliable: use system_supports_32bit_el0() instead. +HAS_32BIT_EL0_DO_NOT_USE HAS_32BIT_EL1 HAS_ADDRESS_AUTH HAS_ADDRESS_AUTH_ARCH-- 2.32.0.rc0.204.g9fa02ecfa5-goog