On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:34:15PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> The condition for reading CR4 was wrong: there are some CPUs with
> CPUID but not CR4. Rather than trying to make the condition exact,
> using __read_cr4_safe().
>
> Reported-by: da...@saggiorato.net
> Fixes: 18bc7bd523e0 ("x86/boot: Synchronize trampoline_cr4_features and
> mmu_cr4_features directly")
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <l...@kernel.org>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 10 +++++++---
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> index 0fa60f5f5a16..5930a4d191b4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -1137,9 +1137,13 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> * auditing all the early-boot CR4 manipulation would be needed to
> * rule it out.
> */
> - if (boot_cpu_data.cpuid_level >= 0)
> - /* A CPU has %cr4 if and only if it has CPUID. */
> - mmu_cr4_features = __read_cr4();
> + if (boot_cpu_data.cpuid_level >= 0) {
> + /*
> + * CPUs without CPUID don't have CR4. CPUs with CPUID
> + * usually have CR4.
> + */
> + mmu_cr4_features = __read_cr4_safe();
> + }
Why are we even doing the CPUID check instead of unconditionally doing
__read_cr4_safe()?
The safe variant will give 0 on !CR4 machines.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
