kernel/linux.git/include/linux/cpu.h, branch v4.9.186

x86/power: Fix 'nosmt' vs hibernation triple fault during resume

2019-06-11T10:22:48+00:00

commit ec527c318036a65a083ef68d8ba95789d2212246 upstream. As explained in 0cc3cd21657b ("cpu/hotplug: Boot HT siblings at least once") we always, no matter what, have to bring up x86 HT siblings during boot at least once in order to avoid first MCE bringing the system to its knees. That means that whenever 'nosmt' is supplied on the kernel command-line, all the HT siblings are as a result sitting in mwait or cpudile after going through the online-offline cycle at least once. This causes a serious issue though when a kernel, which saw 'nosmt' on its commandline, is going to perform resume from hibernation: if the resume from the hibernated image is successful, cr3 is flipped in order to point to the address space of the kernel that is being resumed, which in turn means that all the HT siblings are all of a sudden mwaiting on address which is no longer valid. That results in triple fault shortly after cr3 is switched, and machine reboots. Fix this by always waking up all the SMT siblings before initiating the 'restore from hibernation' process; this guarantees that all the HT siblings will be properly carried over to the resumed kernel waiting in resume_play_dead(), and acted upon accordingly afterwards, based on the target kernel configuration. Symmetricaly, the resumed kernel has to push the SMT siblings to mwait again in case it has SMT disabled; this means it has to online all the siblings when resuming (so that they come out of hlt) and offline them again to let them reach mwait. Cc: 4.19+ # v4.19+ Debugged-by: Thomas Gleixner Fixes: 0cc3cd21657b ("cpu/hotplug: Boot HT siblings at least once") Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina Acked-by: Pavel Machek Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

cpu/speculation: Add 'mitigations=' cmdline option

2019-05-14T17:19:41+00:00

commit 98af8452945c55652de68536afdde3b520fec429 upstream. Keeping track of the number of mitigations for all the CPU speculation bugs has become overwhelming for many users. It's getting more and more complicated to decide which mitigations are needed for a given architecture. Complicating matters is the fact that each arch tends to have its own custom way to mitigate the same vulnerability. Most users fall into a few basic categories: a) they want all mitigations off; b) they want all reasonable mitigations on, with SMT enabled even if it's vulnerable; or c) they want all reasonable mitigations on, with SMT disabled if vulnerable. Define a set of curated, arch-independent options, each of which is an aggregation of existing options: - mitigations=off: Disable all mitigations. - mitigations=auto: [default] Enable all the default mitigations, but leave SMT enabled, even if it's vulnerable. - mitigations=auto,nosmt: Enable all the default mitigations, disabling SMT if needed by a mitigation. Currently, these options are placeholders which don't actually do anything. They will be fleshed out in upcoming patches. Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Tested-by: Jiri Kosina (on x86) Reviewed-by: Jiri Kosina Cc: Borislav Petkov Cc: "H . Peter Anvin" Cc: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Jiri Kosina Cc: Waiman Long Cc: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Jon Masters Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Paul Mackerras Cc: Michael Ellerman Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: Martin Schwidefsky Cc: Heiko Carstens Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Cc: Catalin Marinas Cc: Will Deacon Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Tyler Hicks Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Randy Dunlap Cc: Steven Price Cc: Phil Auld Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/b07a8ef9b7c5055c3a4637c87d07c296d5016fe0.1555085500.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com [bwh: Backported to 4.9: adjust filename] Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

x86/speculation/mds: Add sysfs reporting for MDS

2019-05-14T17:19:40+00:00

commit 8a4b06d391b0a42a373808979b5028f5c84d9c6a upstream. Add the sysfs reporting file for MDS. It exposes the vulnerability and mitigation state similar to the existing files for the other speculative hardware vulnerabilities. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov Reviewed-by: Jon Masters Tested-by: Jon Masters [bwh: Backported to 4.9: test x86_hyper instead of using hypervisor_is_type()] Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

cpu/hotplug: Fix SMT supported evaluation

2018-08-15T16:14:53+00:00

commit bc2d8d262cba5736332cbc866acb11b1c5748aa9 upstream Josh reported that the late SMT evaluation in cpu_smt_state_init() sets cpu_smt_control to CPU_SMT_NOT_SUPPORTED in case that 'nosmt' was supplied on the kernel command line as it cannot differentiate between SMT disabled by BIOS and SMT soft disable via 'nosmt'. That wreckages the state and makes the sysfs interface unusable. Rework this so that during bringup of the non boot CPUs the availability of SMT is determined in cpu_smt_allowed(). If a newly booted CPU is not a 'primary' thread then set the local cpu_smt_available marker and evaluate this explicitely right after the initial SMP bringup has finished. SMT evaulation on x86 is a trainwreck as the firmware has all the information _before_ booting the kernel, but there is no interface to query it. Fixes: 73d5e2b47264 ("cpu/hotplug: detect SMT disabled by BIOS") Reported-by: Josh Poimboeuf Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

cpu/hotplug: Set CPU_SMT_NOT_SUPPORTED early

2018-08-15T16:14:50+00:00

commit fee0aede6f4739c87179eca76136f83210953b86 upstream The CPU_SMT_NOT_SUPPORTED state is set (if the processor does not support SMT) when the sysfs SMT control file is initialized. That was fine so far as this was only required to make the output of the control file correct and to prevent writes in that case. With the upcoming l1tf command line parameter, this needs to be set up before the L1TF mitigation selection and command line parsing happens. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Tested-by: Jiri Kosina Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180713142323.121795971@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

cpu/hotplug: Expose SMT control init function

2018-08-15T16:14:50+00:00

commit 8e1b706b6e819bed215c0db16345568864660393 upstream The L1TF mitigation will gain a commend line parameter which allows to set a combination of hypervisor mitigation and SMT control. Expose cpu_smt_disable() so the command line parser can tweak SMT settings. [ tglx: Split out of larger patch and made it preserve an already existing force off state ] Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Tested-by: Jiri Kosina Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180713142323.039715135@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

cpu/hotplug: Provide knobs to control SMT

2018-08-15T16:14:46+00:00

commit 05736e4ac13c08a4a9b1ef2de26dd31a32cbee57 upstream Provide a command line and a sysfs knob to control SMT. The command line options are: 'nosmt': Enumerate secondary threads, but do not online them 'nosmt=force': Ignore secondary threads completely during enumeration via MP table and ACPI/MADT. The sysfs control file has the following states (read/write): 'on': SMT is enabled. Secondary threads can be freely onlined 'off': SMT is disabled. Secondary threads, even if enumerated cannot be onlined 'forceoff': SMT is permanentely disabled. Writes to the control file are rejected. 'notsupported': SMT is not supported by the CPU The command line option 'nosmt' sets the sysfs control to 'off'. This can be changed to 'on' to reenable SMT during runtime. The command line option 'nosmt=force' sets the sysfs control to 'forceoff'. This cannot be changed during runtime. When SMT is 'on' and the control file is changed to 'off' then all online secondary threads are offlined and attempts to online a secondary thread later on are rejected. When SMT is 'off' and the control file is changed to 'on' then secondary threads can be onlined again. The 'off' -> 'on' transition does not automatically online the secondary threads. When the control file is set to 'forceoff', the behaviour is the same as setting it to 'off', but the operation is irreversible and later writes to the control file are rejected. When the control status is 'notsupported' then writes to the control file are rejected. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Acked-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

x86/speculation/l1tf: Add sysfs reporting for l1tf

2018-08-15T16:14:45+00:00

commit 17dbca119312b4e8173d4e25ff64262119fcef38 upstream L1TF core kernel workarounds are cheap and normally always enabled, However they still should be reported in sysfs if the system is vulnerable or mitigated. Add the necessary CPU feature/bug bits. - Extend the existing checks for Meltdowns to determine if the system is vulnerable. All CPUs which are not vulnerable to Meltdown are also not vulnerable to L1TF - Check for 32bit non PAE and emit a warning as there is no practical way for mitigation due to the limited physical address bits - If the system has more than MAX_PA/2 physical memory the invert page workarounds don't protect the system against the L1TF attack anymore, because an inverted physical address will also point to valid memory. Print a warning in this case and report that the system is vulnerable. Add a function which returns the PFN limit for the L1TF mitigation, which will be used in follow up patches for sanity and range checks. [ tglx: Renamed the CPU feature bit to L1TF_PTEINV ] [ dwmw2: Backport to 4.9 (cpufeatures.h, E820) ] Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf Acked-by: Dave Hansen Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

init: rename and re-order boot_cpu_state_init()

2018-08-15T16:14:42+00:00

commit b5b1404d0815894de0690de8a1ab58269e56eae6 upstream. This is purely a preparatory patch for upcoming changes during the 4.19 merge window. We have a function called "boot_cpu_state_init()" that isn't really about the bootup cpu state: that is done much earlier by the similarly named "boot_cpu_init()" (note lack of "state" in name). This function initializes some hotplug CPU state, and needs to run after the percpu data has been properly initialized. It even has a comment to that effect. Except it _doesn't_ actually run after the percpu data has been properly initialized. On x86 it happens to do that, but on at least arm and arm64, the percpu base pointers are initialized by the arch-specific 'smp_prepare_boot_cpu()' hook, which ran _after_ boot_cpu_state_init(). This had some unexpected results, and in particular we have a patch pending for the merge window that did the obvious cleanup of using 'this_cpu_write()' in the cpu hotplug init code: - per_cpu_ptr(&cpuhp_state, smp_processor_id())->state = CPUHP_ONLINE; + this_cpu_write(cpuhp_state.state, CPUHP_ONLINE); which is obviously the right thing to do. Except because of the ordering issue, it actually failed miserably and unexpectedly on arm64. So this just fixes the ordering, and changes the name of the function to be 'boot_cpu_hotplug_init()' to make it obvious that it's about cpu hotplug state, because the core CPU state was supposed to have already been done earlier. Marked for stable, since the (not yet merged) patch that will show this problem is marked for stable. Reported-by: Vlastimil Babka Reported-by: Mian Yousaf Kaukab Suggested-by: Catalin Marinas Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Will Deacon Cc: stable@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

x86/bugs: Expose /sys/../spec_store_bypass

2018-05-22T14:57:59+00:00

commit c456442cd3a59eeb1d60293c26cbe2ff2c4e42cf upstream Add the sysfs file for the new vulerability. It does not do much except show the words 'Vulnerable' for recent x86 cores. Intel cores prior to family 6 are known not to be vulnerable, and so are some Atoms and some Xeon Phi. It assumes that older Cyrix, Centaur, etc. cores are immune. Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman