| Message ID | 20191019095521.31722-5-maz@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Mainlined |
| Commit | bd227553ad5077f21ddb382dcd910ba46181805a |
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64: KVM: Add workaround for errata 1319367 and 1319537 | expand |
Hi Marc, On 19/10/2019 10:55, Marc Zyngier wrote: > When handling erratum 1319367, we must ensure that the page table > walker cannot parse the S1 page tables while the guest is in an > inconsistent state. This is done as follows: > > On guest entry: > - TCR_EL1.EPD{0,1} are set, ensuring that no PTW can occur > - all system registers are restored, except for TCR_EL1 and SCTLR_EL1 > - stage-2 is restored > - SCTLR_EL1 and TCR_EL1 are restored > > On guest exit: > - SCTLR_EL1.M and TCR_EL1.EPD{0,1} are set, ensuring that no PTW can occur > - stage-2 is disabled > - All host system registers are restored Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> (whitespace nit below) > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c > index 69e10b29cbd0..5765b17c38c7 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c > @@ -118,6 +118,20 @@ static void __hyp_text __activate_traps_nvhe(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > } > > write_sysreg(val, cptr_el2); > + > + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_1319367)) { > + struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt = &vcpu->arch.ctxt; > + > + isb(); > + /* > + * At this stage, and thanks to the above isb(), S2 is > + * configured and enabled. We can now restore the guest's S1 > + * configuration: SCTLR, and only then TCR. > + */ (note for my future self: because the guest may have had M=0 and rubbish in the TTBRs) > + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); > + isb(); > + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1], SYS_TCR); > + } > } > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > index 7ddbc849b580..fb97547bfa79 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > @@ -117,12 +117,26 @@ static void __hyp_text __sysreg_restore_el1_state(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt) > { > write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[MPIDR_EL1], vmpidr_el2); > write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[CSSELR_EL1], csselr_el1); > - write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); > + > + if (!cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_1319367)) { > + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); > + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1], SYS_TCR); > + } else if (!ctxt->__hyp_running_vcpu) { > + /* > + * Must only be done for guest registers, hence the context > + * test. We'recoming from the host, so SCTLR.M is already (Nit: We'recoming?) > + * set. Pairs with __activate_traps_nvhe(). > + */ > + write_sysreg_el1((ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1] | > + TCR_EPD1_MASK | TCR_EPD0_MASK), > + SYS_TCR); > + isb(); > + } Thanks, James
On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:10:44 +0100, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> wrote: Hi James, > Hi Marc, > > On 19/10/2019 10:55, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > When handling erratum 1319367, we must ensure that the page table > > walker cannot parse the S1 page tables while the guest is in an > > inconsistent state. This is done as follows: > > > > On guest entry: > > - TCR_EL1.EPD{0,1} are set, ensuring that no PTW can occur > > - all system registers are restored, except for TCR_EL1 and SCTLR_EL1 > > - stage-2 is restored > > - SCTLR_EL1 and TCR_EL1 are restored > > > > On guest exit: > > - SCTLR_EL1.M and TCR_EL1.EPD{0,1} are set, ensuring that no PTW can occur > > - stage-2 is disabled > > - All host system registers are restored > > Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> > > (whitespace nit below) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c > > index 69e10b29cbd0..5765b17c38c7 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c > > @@ -118,6 +118,20 @@ static void __hyp_text __activate_traps_nvhe(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > } > > > > write_sysreg(val, cptr_el2); > > + > > + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_1319367)) { > > + struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt = &vcpu->arch.ctxt; > > + > > + isb(); > > + /* > > + * At this stage, and thanks to the above isb(), S2 is > > + * configured and enabled. We can now restore the guest's S1 > > + * configuration: SCTLR, and only then TCR. > > + */ > > (note for my future self: because the guest may have had M=0 and rubbish in the TTBRs) > > > + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); > > + isb(); > > + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1], SYS_TCR); > > + } > > } > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > > index 7ddbc849b580..fb97547bfa79 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > > @@ -117,12 +117,26 @@ static void __hyp_text __sysreg_restore_el1_state(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt) > > { > > write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[MPIDR_EL1], vmpidr_el2); > > write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[CSSELR_EL1], csselr_el1); > > - write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); > > + > > + if (!cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_1319367)) { > > + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); > > + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1], SYS_TCR); > > + } else if (!ctxt->__hyp_running_vcpu) { > > + /* > > + * Must only be done for guest registers, hence the context > > + * test. We'recoming from the host, so SCTLR.M is already > > (Nit: We'recoming?) Well spotted, now fixed. And thanks for the reviewing, much appreciated. Catalin, Will: given that this series conflicts with the workaround for erratum 1542419, do you mind taking it via the arm64 tree? To make things a bit simpler, I've updated the series with James' tags at [1], and pushed out a resolution of the merge with arm64/for-next/core [2]. Thanks, M. [1] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git kvm-arm64/erratum-1319367 [2] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git kvm-arm64/erratum-1319367-resolved
On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 11:20:35AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Catalin, Will: given that this series conflicts with the workaround for > erratum 1542419, do you mind taking it via the arm64 tree? I assume you target 5.5 with this workaround. I don't mind merging it but if you want to queue it, we already have a stable for-next/neoverse-n1-stale-instr branch with 1542419 (I'll push a fixup on top soon for a clang warning). The other issue is that we get a conflict with mainline due to the tx2 erratum. If it gets too complicated, I'll also merge for-next/fixes into for-next/core.
On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 10:32:17 +0000, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote: Hi Catalin, > On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 11:20:35AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Catalin, Will: given that this series conflicts with the workaround for > > erratum 1542419, do you mind taking it via the arm64 tree? > > I assume you target 5.5 with this workaround. Absolutely. I'm happy to look at backports once this is in. > I don't mind merging it but if you want to queue it, we already have > a stable for-next/neoverse-n1-stale-instr branch with 1542419 (I'll > push a fixup on top soon for a clang warning). The other issue is > that we get a conflict with mainline due to the tx2 erratum. If it > gets too complicated, I'll also merge for-next/fixes into > for-next/core. OK, let me have another look at providing a resolution that includes all of the above. Worse case, you'll be able to pull the branch directly. Thanks, M.
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:49:37AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 10:32:17 +0000, > Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 11:20:35AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > Catalin, Will: given that this series conflicts with the workaround for > > > erratum 1542419, do you mind taking it via the arm64 tree? [...] > > I don't mind merging it but if you want to queue it, we already have > > a stable for-next/neoverse-n1-stale-instr branch with 1542419 (I'll > > push a fixup on top soon for a clang warning). The other issue is > > that we get a conflict with mainline due to the tx2 erratum. If it > > gets too complicated, I'll also merge for-next/fixes into > > for-next/core. > > OK, let me have another look at providing a resolution that includes > all of the above. Worse case, you'll be able to pull the branch > directly. Don't worry about the resolution, I'll fix it up myself when merging into for-next/core. The latter is not a stable branch, just an octopus merge of various for-next/* topic branches.
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c index 69e10b29cbd0..5765b17c38c7 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c @@ -118,6 +118,20 @@ static void __hyp_text __activate_traps_nvhe(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) } write_sysreg(val, cptr_el2); + + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_1319367)) { + struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt = &vcpu->arch.ctxt; + + isb(); + /* + * At this stage, and thanks to the above isb(), S2 is + * configured and enabled. We can now restore the guest's S1 + * configuration: SCTLR, and only then TCR. + */ + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); + isb(); + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1], SYS_TCR); + } } static void __hyp_text __activate_traps(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) @@ -156,6 +170,23 @@ static void __hyp_text __deactivate_traps_nvhe(void) { u64 mdcr_el2 = read_sysreg(mdcr_el2); + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_1319367)) { + u64 val; + + /* + * Set the TCR and SCTLR registers in the exact opposite + * sequence as __activate_traps_nvhe (first prevent walks, + * then force the MMU on). A generous sprinkling of isb() + * ensure that things happen in this exact order. + */ + val = read_sysreg_el1(SYS_TCR); + write_sysreg_el1(val | TCR_EPD1_MASK | TCR_EPD0_MASK, SYS_TCR); + isb(); + val = read_sysreg_el1(SYS_SCTLR); + write_sysreg_el1(val | SCTLR_ELx_M, SYS_SCTLR); + isb(); + } + __deactivate_traps_common(); mdcr_el2 &= MDCR_EL2_HPMN_MASK; diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c index 7ddbc849b580..fb97547bfa79 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c @@ -117,12 +117,26 @@ static void __hyp_text __sysreg_restore_el1_state(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt) { write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[MPIDR_EL1], vmpidr_el2); write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[CSSELR_EL1], csselr_el1); - write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); + + if (!cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_1319367)) { + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1], SYS_TCR); + } else if (!ctxt->__hyp_running_vcpu) { + /* + * Must only be done for guest registers, hence the context + * test. We'recoming from the host, so SCTLR.M is already + * set. Pairs with __activate_traps_nvhe(). + */ + write_sysreg_el1((ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1] | + TCR_EPD1_MASK | TCR_EPD0_MASK), + SYS_TCR); + isb(); + } + write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[ACTLR_EL1], actlr_el1); write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[CPACR_EL1], SYS_CPACR); write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TTBR0_EL1], SYS_TTBR0); write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TTBR1_EL1], SYS_TTBR1); - write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1], SYS_TCR); write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[ESR_EL1], SYS_ESR); write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[AFSR0_EL1], SYS_AFSR0); write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[AFSR1_EL1], SYS_AFSR1); @@ -135,6 +149,23 @@ static void __hyp_text __sysreg_restore_el1_state(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt) write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[PAR_EL1], par_el1); write_sysreg(ctxt->sys_regs[TPIDR_EL1], tpidr_el1); + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_1319367) && + ctxt->__hyp_running_vcpu) { + /* + * Must only be done for host registers, hence the context + * test. Pairs with __deactivate_traps_nvhe(). + */ + isb(); + /* + * At this stage, and thanks to the above isb(), S2 is + * deconfigured and disabled. We can now restore the host's + * S1 configuration: SCTLR, and only then TCR. + */ + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[SCTLR_EL1], SYS_SCTLR); + isb(); + write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->sys_regs[TCR_EL1], SYS_TCR); + } + write_sysreg(ctxt->gp_regs.sp_el1, sp_el1); write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->gp_regs.elr_el1, SYS_ELR); write_sysreg_el1(ctxt->gp_regs.spsr[KVM_SPSR_EL1],SYS_SPSR);
When handling erratum 1319367, we must ensure that the page table walker cannot parse the S1 page tables while the guest is in an inconsistent state. This is done as follows: On guest entry: - TCR_EL1.EPD{0,1} are set, ensuring that no PTW can occur - all system registers are restored, except for TCR_EL1 and SCTLR_EL1 - stage-2 is restored - SCTLR_EL1 and TCR_EL1 are restored On guest exit: - SCTLR_EL1.M and TCR_EL1.EPD{0,1} are set, ensuring that no PTW can occur - stage-2 is disabled - All host system registers are restored Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> --- arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)