| Message ID | 20210210005205.783377-1-jcrouse@codeaurora.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 8490f02a3ca45fd1bbcadc243b4db9b69d0e3450 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] drm/msm: a6xx: Make sure the SQE microcode is safe | expand |
On 2/10/2021 6:22 AM, Jordan Crouse wrote: > Most a6xx targets have security issues that were fixed with new versions > of the microcode(s). Make sure that we are booting with a safe version of > the microcode for the target and print a message and error if not. > > v2: Add more informative error messages and fix typos > > Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org> > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c > index ba8e9d3cf0fe..064b7face504 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c > @@ -522,28 +522,73 @@ static int a6xx_cp_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) > return a6xx_idle(gpu, ring) ? 0 : -EINVAL; > } > > -static void a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu, > +/* > + * Check that the microcode version is new enough to include several key > + * security fixes. Return true if the ucode is safe. > + */ > +static bool a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu, > struct drm_gem_object *obj) > { > + struct adreno_gpu *adreno_gpu = &a6xx_gpu->base; > + struct msm_gpu *gpu = &adreno_gpu->base; > u32 *buf = msm_gem_get_vaddr(obj); > + bool ret = false; > > if (IS_ERR(buf)) > - return; > + return false; > > /* > - * If the lowest nibble is 0xa that is an indication that this microcode > - * has been patched. The actual version is in dword [3] but we only care > - * about the patchlevel which is the lowest nibble of dword [3] > - * > - * Otherwise check that the firmware is greater than or equal to 1.90 > - * which was the first version that had this fix built in > + * Targets up to a640 (a618, a630 and a640) need to check for a > + * microcode version that is patched to support the whereami opcode or > + * one that is new enough to include it by default. > */ > - if (((buf[0] & 0xf) == 0xa) && (buf[2] & 0xf) >= 1) > - a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; > - else if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) > 0x190) > - a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; > + if (adreno_is_a618(adreno_gpu) || adreno_is_a630(adreno_gpu) || > + adreno_is_a640(adreno_gpu)) { > + /* > + * If the lowest nibble is 0xa that is an indication that this > + * microcode has been patched. The actual version is in dword > + * [3] but we only care about the patchlevel which is the lowest > + * nibble of dword [3] > + * > + * Otherwise check that the firmware is greater than or equal > + * to 1.90 which was the first version that had this fix built > + * in > + */ > + if ((((buf[0] & 0xf) == 0xa) && (buf[2] & 0xf) >= 1) || > + (buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x190) { > + a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; > + ret = true; > + goto out; > + } > > + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, > + "a630 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", > + buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x190); > + } else { > + /* > + * a650 tier targets don't need whereami but still need to be > + * equal to or newer than 1.95 for other security fixes > + */ > + if (adreno_is_a650(adreno_gpu)) { > + if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x195) { > + ret = true; > + goto out; > + } > + > + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, > + "a650 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", > + buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x195); > + } > + > + /* > + * When a660 is added those targets should return true here > + * since those have all the critical security fixes built in > + * from the start > + */ Or we can just initialize 'ret' as true. -Akhil > + } > +out: > msm_gem_put_vaddr(obj); > + return ret; > } > > static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) > @@ -566,7 +611,13 @@ static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) > } > > msm_gem_object_set_name(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, "sqefw"); > - a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); > + if (!a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo)) { > + msm_gem_unpin_iova(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, gpu->aspace); > + drm_gem_object_put(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); > + > + a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo = NULL; > + return -EPERM; > + } > } > > gpu_write64(gpu, REG_A6XX_CP_SQE_INSTR_BASE_LO, >
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 06:50:28PM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote: > On 2/10/2021 6:22 AM, Jordan Crouse wrote: > >Most a6xx targets have security issues that were fixed with new versions > >of the microcode(s). Make sure that we are booting with a safe version of > >the microcode for the target and print a message and error if not. > > > >v2: Add more informative error messages and fix typos > > > >Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org> > >--- > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c > >index ba8e9d3cf0fe..064b7face504 100644 > >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c > >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c > >@@ -522,28 +522,73 @@ static int a6xx_cp_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) > > return a6xx_idle(gpu, ring) ? 0 : -EINVAL; > > } > >-static void a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu, > >+/* > >+ * Check that the microcode version is new enough to include several key > >+ * security fixes. Return true if the ucode is safe. > >+ */ > >+static bool a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu, > > struct drm_gem_object *obj) > > { > >+ struct adreno_gpu *adreno_gpu = &a6xx_gpu->base; > >+ struct msm_gpu *gpu = &adreno_gpu->base; > > u32 *buf = msm_gem_get_vaddr(obj); > >+ bool ret = false; > > if (IS_ERR(buf)) > >- return; > >+ return false; > > /* > >- * If the lowest nibble is 0xa that is an indication that this microcode > >- * has been patched. The actual version is in dword [3] but we only care > >- * about the patchlevel which is the lowest nibble of dword [3] > >- * > >- * Otherwise check that the firmware is greater than or equal to 1.90 > >- * which was the first version that had this fix built in > >+ * Targets up to a640 (a618, a630 and a640) need to check for a > >+ * microcode version that is patched to support the whereami opcode or > >+ * one that is new enough to include it by default. > > */ > >- if (((buf[0] & 0xf) == 0xa) && (buf[2] & 0xf) >= 1) > >- a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; > >- else if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) > 0x190) > >- a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; > >+ if (adreno_is_a618(adreno_gpu) || adreno_is_a630(adreno_gpu) || > >+ adreno_is_a640(adreno_gpu)) { > >+ /* > >+ * If the lowest nibble is 0xa that is an indication that this > >+ * microcode has been patched. The actual version is in dword > >+ * [3] but we only care about the patchlevel which is the lowest > >+ * nibble of dword [3] > >+ * > >+ * Otherwise check that the firmware is greater than or equal > >+ * to 1.90 which was the first version that had this fix built > >+ * in > >+ */ > >+ if ((((buf[0] & 0xf) == 0xa) && (buf[2] & 0xf) >= 1) || > >+ (buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x190) { > >+ a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; > >+ ret = true; > >+ goto out; > >+ } > >+ DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, > >+ "a630 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", > >+ buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x190); > >+ } else { > >+ /* > >+ * a650 tier targets don't need whereami but still need to be > >+ * equal to or newer than 1.95 for other security fixes > >+ */ > >+ if (adreno_is_a650(adreno_gpu)) { > >+ if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x195) { > >+ ret = true; > >+ goto out; > >+ } > >+ > >+ DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, > >+ "a650 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", > >+ buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x195); > >+ } > >+ > >+ /* > >+ * When a660 is added those targets should return true here > >+ * since those have all the critical security fixes built in > >+ * from the start > >+ */ > Or we can just initialize 'ret' as true. I thought about it and I think I want to force an accept list here instead of letting new targets get by with an implicit pass. Jordan > -Akhil > >+ } > >+out: > > msm_gem_put_vaddr(obj); > >+ return ret; > > } > > static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) > >@@ -566,7 +611,13 @@ static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) > > } > > msm_gem_object_set_name(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, "sqefw"); > >- a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); > >+ if (!a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo)) { > >+ msm_gem_unpin_iova(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, gpu->aspace); > >+ drm_gem_object_put(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); > >+ > >+ a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo = NULL; > >+ return -EPERM; > >+ } > > } > > gpu_write64(gpu, REG_A6XX_CP_SQE_INSTR_BASE_LO, > > >
On 2/11/2021 9:32 PM, Jordan Crouse wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 06:50:28PM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote: >> On 2/10/2021 6:22 AM, Jordan Crouse wrote: >>> Most a6xx targets have security issues that were fixed with new versions >>> of the microcode(s). Make sure that we are booting with a safe version of >>> the microcode for the target and print a message and error if not. >>> >>> v2: Add more informative error messages and fix typos >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org> >>> --- >>> >>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- >>> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c >>> index ba8e9d3cf0fe..064b7face504 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c >>> @@ -522,28 +522,73 @@ static int a6xx_cp_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) >>> return a6xx_idle(gpu, ring) ? 0 : -EINVAL; >>> } >>> -static void a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu, >>> +/* >>> + * Check that the microcode version is new enough to include several key >>> + * security fixes. Return true if the ucode is safe. >>> + */ >>> +static bool a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu, >>> struct drm_gem_object *obj) >>> { >>> + struct adreno_gpu *adreno_gpu = &a6xx_gpu->base; >>> + struct msm_gpu *gpu = &adreno_gpu->base; >>> u32 *buf = msm_gem_get_vaddr(obj); >>> + bool ret = false; >>> if (IS_ERR(buf)) >>> - return; >>> + return false; >>> /* >>> - * If the lowest nibble is 0xa that is an indication that this microcode >>> - * has been patched. The actual version is in dword [3] but we only care >>> - * about the patchlevel which is the lowest nibble of dword [3] >>> - * >>> - * Otherwise check that the firmware is greater than or equal to 1.90 >>> - * which was the first version that had this fix built in >>> + * Targets up to a640 (a618, a630 and a640) need to check for a >>> + * microcode version that is patched to support the whereami opcode or >>> + * one that is new enough to include it by default. >>> */ >>> - if (((buf[0] & 0xf) == 0xa) && (buf[2] & 0xf) >= 1) >>> - a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; >>> - else if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) > 0x190) >>> - a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; >>> + if (adreno_is_a618(adreno_gpu) || adreno_is_a630(adreno_gpu) || >>> + adreno_is_a640(adreno_gpu)) { nit: I feel a 'switch(revn)' would be more readable. Reviewed-by: Akhil P Oommen <akhilpo@codeaurora.org> -Akhil >>> + /* >>> + * If the lowest nibble is 0xa that is an indication that this >>> + * microcode has been patched. The actual version is in dword >>> + * [3] but we only care about the patchlevel which is the lowest >>> + * nibble of dword [3] >>> + * >>> + * Otherwise check that the firmware is greater than or equal >>> + * to 1.90 which was the first version that had this fix built >>> + * in >>> + */ >>> + if ((((buf[0] & 0xf) == 0xa) && (buf[2] & 0xf) >= 1) || >>> + (buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x190) { >>> + a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; >>> + ret = true; >>> + goto out; >>> + } >>> + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, >>> + "a630 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", >>> + buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x190); >>> + } else { >>> + /* >>> + * a650 tier targets don't need whereami but still need to be >>> + * equal to or newer than 1.95 for other security fixes >>> + */ >>> + if (adreno_is_a650(adreno_gpu)) { >>> + if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x195) { >>> + ret = true; >>> + goto out; >>> + } >>> + >>> + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, >>> + "a650 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", >>> + buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x195); >>> + } >>> + >>> + /* >>> + * When a660 is added those targets should return true here >>> + * since those have all the critical security fixes built in >>> + * from the start >>> + */ >> Or we can just initialize 'ret' as true. > > I thought about it and I think I want to force an accept list here instead of > letting new targets get by with an implicit pass. > > Jordan > >> -Akhil >>> + } >>> +out: >>> msm_gem_put_vaddr(obj); >>> + return ret; >>> } >>> static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) >>> @@ -566,7 +611,13 @@ static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) >>> } >>> msm_gem_object_set_name(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, "sqefw"); >>> - a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); >>> + if (!a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo)) { >>> + msm_gem_unpin_iova(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, gpu->aspace); >>> + drm_gem_object_put(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); >>> + >>> + a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo = NULL; >>> + return -EPERM; >>> + } >>> } >>> gpu_write64(gpu, REG_A6XX_CP_SQE_INSTR_BASE_LO, >>> >> >
Hello, On 10/02/2021 03:52, Jordan Crouse wrote: > Most a6xx targets have security issues that were fixed with new versions > of the microcode(s). Make sure that we are booting with a safe version of > the microcode for the target and print a message and error if not. > > v2: Add more informative error messages and fix typos > > Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org> [skipped] > + } else { > + /* > + * a650 tier targets don't need whereami but still need to be > + * equal to or newer than 1.95 for other security fixes > + */ > + if (adreno_is_a650(adreno_gpu)) { > + if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x195) { > + ret = true; > + goto out; > + } I think this is incorrect. The latest firmware i have here also fails this check, with the buf[0] = 0x016dd099, so buf[0] & 0xfff = 0x099. Could you please confirm the versioning? > + > + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, > + "a650 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", > + buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x195); > + } > + > + /* > + * When a660 is added those targets should return true here > + * since those have all the critical security fixes built in > + * from the start > + */ > + } > +out: > msm_gem_put_vaddr(obj); > + return ret; > } > > static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) > @@ -566,7 +611,13 @@ static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) > } > > msm_gem_object_set_name(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, "sqefw"); > - a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); > + if (!a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo)) { > + msm_gem_unpin_iova(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, gpu->aspace); > + drm_gem_object_put(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); > + > + a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo = NULL; > + return -EPERM; > + } > } > > gpu_write64(gpu, REG_A6XX_CP_SQE_INSTR_BASE_LO,
Hello: This patch was applied to qcom/linux.git (refs/heads/for-next): On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 17:52:05 -0700 you wrote: > Most a6xx targets have security issues that were fixed with new versions > of the microcode(s). Make sure that we are booting with a safe version of > the microcode for the target and print a message and error if not. > > v2: Add more informative error messages and fix typos > > Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org> > > [...] Here is the summary with links: - [v2] drm/msm: a6xx: Make sure the SQE microcode is safe https://git.kernel.org/qcom/c/8490f02a3ca4 You are awesome, thank you! -- Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot. https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c index ba8e9d3cf0fe..064b7face504 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c @@ -522,28 +522,73 @@ static int a6xx_cp_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) return a6xx_idle(gpu, ring) ? 0 : -EINVAL; } -static void a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu, +/* + * Check that the microcode version is new enough to include several key + * security fixes. Return true if the ucode is safe. + */ +static bool a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu, struct drm_gem_object *obj) { + struct adreno_gpu *adreno_gpu = &a6xx_gpu->base; + struct msm_gpu *gpu = &adreno_gpu->base; u32 *buf = msm_gem_get_vaddr(obj); + bool ret = false; if (IS_ERR(buf)) - return; + return false; /* - * If the lowest nibble is 0xa that is an indication that this microcode - * has been patched. The actual version is in dword [3] but we only care - * about the patchlevel which is the lowest nibble of dword [3] - * - * Otherwise check that the firmware is greater than or equal to 1.90 - * which was the first version that had this fix built in + * Targets up to a640 (a618, a630 and a640) need to check for a + * microcode version that is patched to support the whereami opcode or + * one that is new enough to include it by default. */ - if (((buf[0] & 0xf) == 0xa) && (buf[2] & 0xf) >= 1) - a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; - else if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) > 0x190) - a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; + if (adreno_is_a618(adreno_gpu) || adreno_is_a630(adreno_gpu) || + adreno_is_a640(adreno_gpu)) { + /* + * If the lowest nibble is 0xa that is an indication that this + * microcode has been patched. The actual version is in dword + * [3] but we only care about the patchlevel which is the lowest + * nibble of dword [3] + * + * Otherwise check that the firmware is greater than or equal + * to 1.90 which was the first version that had this fix built + * in + */ + if ((((buf[0] & 0xf) == 0xa) && (buf[2] & 0xf) >= 1) || + (buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x190) { + a6xx_gpu->has_whereami = true; + ret = true; + goto out; + } + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, + "a630 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", + buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x190); + } else { + /* + * a650 tier targets don't need whereami but still need to be + * equal to or newer than 1.95 for other security fixes + */ + if (adreno_is_a650(adreno_gpu)) { + if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x195) { + ret = true; + goto out; + } + + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev, + "a650 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n", + buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x195); + } + + /* + * When a660 is added those targets should return true here + * since those have all the critical security fixes built in + * from the start + */ + } +out: msm_gem_put_vaddr(obj); + return ret; } static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) @@ -566,7 +611,13 @@ static int a6xx_ucode_init(struct msm_gpu *gpu) } msm_gem_object_set_name(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, "sqefw"); - a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); + if (!a6xx_ucode_check_version(a6xx_gpu, a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo)) { + msm_gem_unpin_iova(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo, gpu->aspace); + drm_gem_object_put(a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo); + + a6xx_gpu->sqe_bo = NULL; + return -EPERM; + } } gpu_write64(gpu, REG_A6XX_CP_SQE_INSTR_BASE_LO,
Most a6xx targets have security issues that were fixed with new versions of the microcode(s). Make sure that we are booting with a safe version of the microcode for the target and print a message and error if not. v2: Add more informative error messages and fix typos Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org> --- drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)