On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 01:11:49PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 05:22:01PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote:
[...] > > I'll take a look at your code anyway in case there's something > > else one of us didn't think of. > > Thanks, Dave. > > This is the branch: > https://github.com/norov/linux/tree/ilp32-4.15-rc7 > > SVE-related changes are mostly in patches: > arm64: ilp32: introduce ilp32-specific handlers for sigframe and ucontext > arm64: signal32: move ilp32 and aarch32 common code to separated file > arm64: signal: share lp64 signal structures and routines to ilp32 > arm64: ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it Thanks for the pointer. Quick review of the relevant patches below. > From 6f566a512cbac378ccee66094b5f9124b6069275 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Andrew Pinski <apin...@cavium.com> > Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 03:04:47 +0300 > Subject: [PATCH 17/24] arm64: ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in > entry.S) to use it > > Add a separate syscall-table for ILP32, which dispatches either to native > LP64 system call implementation or to compat-syscalls, as appropriate. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Pinski <andrew.pin...@caviumnetworks.com> > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yno...@caviumnetworks.com> > Signed-off-by: Bamvor Jian Zhang <bamvor.zhangj...@linaro.org> [...] > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S > index 778726d..d2d7336 100644 [...] > @@ -864,14 +882,15 @@ ENDPROC(ret_to_user) > el0_svc: > ldr x16, [tsk, #TSK_TI_FLAGS] // load thread flags > adrp stbl, sys_call_table // load syscall table pointer > + ldr x19, [tsk, #TSK_TI_FLAGS] > mov wscno, w8 // syscall number in w8 > mov wsc_nr, #__NR_syscalls > > #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_SVE > alternative_if_not ARM64_SVE > - b el0_svc_naked > + b el0_svc_select_table > alternative_else_nop_endif > - tbz x16, #TIF_SVE, el0_svc_naked // Skip unless TIF_SVE set: > + tbz x16, #TIF_SVE, el0_svc_select_table // Skip unless TIF_SVE > set: > bic x16, x16, #_TIF_SVE // discard SVE state > str x16, [tsk, #TSK_TI_FLAGS] > > @@ -887,12 +906,19 @@ alternative_else_nop_endif > msr cpacr_el1, x9 // synchronised by eret to el0 > #endif > > +el0_svc_select_table: > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ILP32 > + tst x19, #_TIF_32BIT_AARCH64 > + b.eq el0_svc_naked // We are using LP64 syscall > table Can tbz be used here? > + adrp stbl, sys_call_ilp32_table // load ilp32 syscall table > pointer > + delouse_input_regs > +#endif > el0_svc_naked: // compat entry point > stp x0, xscno, [sp, #S_ORIG_X0] // save the original x0 and > syscall number [...] > From 6e55e1c381aa4b6e10ac5eda0a587adf5558f438 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Yury Norov <yno...@caviumnetworks.com> > Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:11:58 +0300 > Subject: [PATCH 18/24] arm64: signal: share lp64 signal structures and > routines to ilp32 Nit: Please ensure that the commit message makes sense without the subject line, so that users of Mutt etc., can see all necessary context in the message body when drafting a reply. > After that, it will be possible to reuse it in ilp32. > > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yno...@caviumnetworks.com> [...] > +#define parse_user_sigcontext(user, sf) > \ > + __parse_user_sigcontext(user, &(sf)->uc.uc_mcontext, sf) Nit: can this #define be kept next to the function it wraps? > + > +struct user_ctxs { > + struct fpsimd_context __user *fpsimd; > + struct sve_context __user *sve; > +}; > + > +struct frame_record { > + u64 fp; > + u64 lr; > +}; > +struct rt_sigframe_user_layout; > + > +int setup_extra_context(char __user *sfp, unsigned long users, char __user > *userp); > +int __parse_user_sigcontext(struct user_ctxs *user, > + struct sigcontext __user const *sc, > + void __user const *sigframe_base); [...] > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c [...] > +int setup_extra_context(char __user *sfp, unsigned long users, char __user > *userp) > +{ > + int err =0; Nit: missing space. Also, while "user<blah>" seemed OK as a local variable name, it now looks rather obscure as a function parameter name, since the meaning of the parameter is not so obvious. "users" is really the total sigframe size, so "sf_size" may be a reasonable name. "extrap" might be a slightly better name for "userp", since this is not a general-purpose cursor and must point to the base address computed for the extra_context block. (I'm open to better suggestions though.) > + struct extra_context __user *extra; > + struct _aarch64_ctx __user *end; > + u64 extra_datap; > + u32 extra_size; > + > + extra = (struct extra_context __user *)userp; > + userp += EXTRA_CONTEXT_SIZE; > + > + end = (struct _aarch64_ctx __user *)userp; > + userp += TERMINATOR_SIZE; > + > + /* > + * extra_datap is just written to the signal frame. > + * The value gets cast back to a void __user * > + * during sigreturn. > + */ > + extra_datap = (__force u64)userp; > + extra_size = sfp + round_up(users, 16) - userp; > + > + __put_user_error(EXTRA_MAGIC, &extra->head.magic, err); > + __put_user_error(EXTRA_CONTEXT_SIZE, &extra->head.size, err); > + __put_user_error(extra_datap, &extra->datap, err); > + __put_user_error(extra_size, &extra->size, err); > + > + /* Add the terminator */ > + __put_user_error(0, &end->magic, err); > + __put_user_error(0, &end->size, err); > + > + return err; > +} [...] > @@ -652,39 +656,9 @@ static int setup_sigframe(struct rt_sigframe_user_layout > *user, > err |= preserve_sve_context(sve_ctx); > } > > - if (err == 0 && user->extra_offset) { > - char __user *sfp = (char __user *)user->sigframe; > - char __user *userp = > - apply_user_offset(user, user->extra_offset); > - > - struct extra_context __user *extra; > - struct _aarch64_ctx __user *end; > - u64 extra_datap; > - u32 extra_size; > - > - extra = (struct extra_context __user *)userp; > - userp += EXTRA_CONTEXT_SIZE; > - > - end = (struct _aarch64_ctx __user *)userp; > - userp += TERMINATOR_SIZE; > - > - /* > - * extra_datap is just written to the signal frame. > - * The value gets cast back to a void __user * > - * during sigreturn. > - */ > - extra_datap = (__force u64)userp; > - extra_size = sfp + round_up(user->size, 16) - userp; > - > - __put_user_error(EXTRA_MAGIC, &extra->head.magic, err); > - __put_user_error(EXTRA_CONTEXT_SIZE, &extra->head.size, err); > - __put_user_error(extra_datap, &extra->datap, err); > - __put_user_error(extra_size, &extra->size, err); > - > - /* Add the terminator */ > - __put_user_error(0, &end->magic, err); > - __put_user_error(0, &end->size, err); > - } > + if (err == 0 && user->extra_offset) > + setup_extra_context((char *) user->sigframe, user->size, > + (char *) apply_user_offset(user, user->extra_offset)); Nit: no space after (type *) please. Also, can we have (char __user *)? This is more "correct" because these arguments are not valid kernel pointers. Keeping the __user may avoid sparse warnings. (I've not tried to build the code yet, so I don't know whether sparse actually complains about __user being cast on and off here.) [...] > From 735931121210a692038859448bf9f4ac5905eb73 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Yury Norov <yno...@caviumnetworks.comk> > Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 03:04:50 +0300 > Subject: [PATCH 20/24] arm64: ilp32: introduce ilp32-specific handlers for > sigframe and ucontext > > ILP32 uses AARCH32 compat structures and syscall handlers for signals. > But ILP32 struct rt_sigframe and ucontext differs from both LP64 and > AARCH32. So some specific mechanism is needed to take care of it. > > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yno...@caviumnetworks.com> The code here looks reasonably correct, but there is a lot of unnecessary duplication of code that should really be common. This code is security-critical and tricky to get right, so we don't want to have to maintain and test two independent implementations of anything if we can possibly avoid it. I think there may at least one change in the LP64 code that has not been propagated here (the call to fpsimd_signal_preserve_current_state() in setup_rt_frame()). There will likely be more such cases in the future. [...] diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal_ilp32.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal_ilp32.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a1cb058 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal_ilp32.c [...] > +#define BASE_SIGFRAME_SIZE round_up(sizeof(struct ilp32_rt_sigframe), 16) > + > +struct ilp32_ucontext { > + u32 uc_flags; > + u32 uc_link; > + compat_stack_t uc_stack; > + compat_sigset_t uc_sigmask; > + /* glibc uses a 1024-bit sigset_t */ > + __u8 __unused[1024 / 8 - sizeof(compat_sigset_t)]; > + /* last for future expansion */ > + struct sigcontext uc_mcontext; > +}; > + > +struct ilp32_rt_sigframe { > + struct compat_siginfo info; > + struct ilp32_ucontext uc; > +}; > + > +struct ilp32_rt_sigframe_user_layout { > + struct ilp32_rt_sigframe __user *sigframe; I think much of the duplication here flows from the fact that this struct currently has a different type for ILP32 versus LP64, even though all the important contents of the structure are equivalent for the two cases. Can we replace the sigframe pointer with a void __user *, or union { struct rt_sigframe __user *; struct ilp32_rt_sigframe __user *; } ? Putting a pointer to sigcontext in here may also help, since it looks the same for both cases: only its location changes (I think). This would allow us to use the same sigframe_user_layout struct for the lp64 and ilp32 cases, which will make it easier to share code. The __reserved[] and extra_context blocks and the records in them should be handled identically for the two ABIs: the only thing that should differ is the offset of __reserved[] in the complete signal frame. We should try hard to make as much code as possible generic here. I won't comment on the individual functions for now: I think they can all be mostly or completely eliminated. [...] Cheers ---Dave _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
