From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] x86, microcode, intel: guard against misaligned microcode data
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 20:59:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141107195905.GE5180@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1410197875-19252-8-git-send-email-hmh@hmh.eng.br>
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 02:37:53PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> The full requirements for the memory area which holds the microcode
> update binary data can be found in the Intel SDM, vol 3A, section
> 9.11.6, page 9-34. They basically boil down to: 16-byte alignment, and
> the data area must be entirely mapped if paging is already enabled.
>
> The regular microcode update driver doesn't have to do anything special
> to meet these requirements. For peace of mind, add a check to
> WARN_ONCE() when the alignment is (unexpectedly) incorrect, and abort
> the microcode update.
>
> However, the early microcode update driver can only expect 4-byte
> alignment out of the early initramfs file format (which is actually good
> enough for many Intel processors, but unless Intel oficially documents
> this, we cannot make use of that fact). The microcode update data will
> not be aligned to a 16-byte boundary unless userspace takes special
> steps to ensure it.
>
> Change the early microcode driver to make a temporary copy of a portion
> of the microcode header, and move the microcode data backwards
> (overwriting the header) to a suitably aligned position, right before
> issuing the microcode update WRMSR.
>
> Unfortunately, to keep things simple, this has to be undone right after
> the processor finishes the WRMSR. Therefore, the alignment process will
> have to be redone *for every processor core*. This might end up not
> being really noticeable, as the microcode update operation itself is
> already extremely expensive in processor cycles.
>
> If the microcode update data is already aligned in the first place, the
> alignment process is skipped. Users of large systems are encouraged to
> use updated userspace that ensures 16-byte alignment of the microcode
> data file contents inside the early initramfs image.
>
> Add the relevant details to Documentation/x86/early-microcode.txt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
> ---
> Documentation/x86/early-microcode.txt | 10 +++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 5 +++++
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel_early.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/x86/early-microcode.txt b/Documentation/x86/early-microcode.txt
> index d62bea6..c4f2ebd 100644
> --- a/Documentation/x86/early-microcode.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/x86/early-microcode.txt
> @@ -14,6 +14,16 @@ during boot time. The microcode file in cpio name space is:
> on Intel: kernel/x86/microcode/GenuineIntel.bin
> on AMD : kernel/x86/microcode/AuthenticAMD.bin
>
> +For Intel processors, the microcode load process will be faster when special
faster??
> +care is taken to ensure that the kernel/x86/microcode/GenuineIntel.bin file
> +*data* inside the cpio archive is aligned to a paragraph (16-byte boundary).
> +Standard pax/cpio can be coaxed into doing this by adding a padding file, e.g.
> +"kernel/x86/microcode/.padding" with the appropriate size *right before* the
> +kernel/x86/microcode/GenuineIntel.bin file. Beware the required size for the
> +padding file as it depends on the behavior of the tool used to create the cpio
> +archive. It is also possible to use a specific tool that appends enough NULs
> +_to_ the file name (not _after_ the file name!) to align the file data.
> +
> During BSP boot (before SMP starts), if the kernel finds the microcode file in
> the initrd file, it parses the microcode and saves matching microcode in memory.
> If matching microcode is found, it will be uploaded in BSP and later on in all
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> index 2182cec..40caef1 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -157,6 +157,11 @@ static int apply_microcode_intel(int cpu)
> if (mc_intel == NULL)
> return 0;
>
> + /* Intel SDM vol 3A section 9.11.6, page 9-34 */
> + if (WARN_ONCE((unsigned long)(mc_intel->bits) % 16,
> + "microcode data incorrectly aligned"))
I wonder how many people would start complaining when this goes out the
door? Have you checked actually how the majority of the tools do layout
the microcode in the initrd?
> + return -1;
> +
> /*
> * Microcode on this CPU might be already up-to-date. Only apply
> * the microcode patch in mc_intel when it is newer than the one
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel_early.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel_early.c
> index 92629a8..994c59b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel_early.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel_early.c
> @@ -662,14 +662,40 @@ static int apply_microcode_early(struct mc_saved_data *mc_saved_data,
> struct microcode_intel *mc_intel;
> unsigned int val[2];
>
> + char savedbuf[16];
> + void *mcu_data;
> + void *aligned_mcu_data;
> + unsigned int mcu_size = 0;
> +
> mc_intel = uci->mc;
> if (mc_intel == NULL)
> return 0;
>
> + mcu_data = mc_intel->bits;
> + aligned_mcu_data = mc_intel->bits;
> +
> + /* Intel SDM vol 3A section 9.11.6, page 9-34: */
> + /* WRMSR MSR_IA32_UCODE_WRITE requires 16-byte alignment */
Kernel comment style:
/*
* Blabla.
* More bla.
*/
> + if ((unsigned long)(mcu_data) % 16) {
> + /* We have more than 16 bytes worth of microcode header
> + * just before mc_intel->bits on a version 1 header */
> + BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct microcode_intel, bits) < 16);
That's not really needed - I don't see struct microcode_header_intel
changing anytime soon.
> +
> + aligned_mcu_data = (void *)((unsigned long)(mcu_data) & ~15UL);
> + mcu_size = get_datasize(&mc_intel->hdr);
> + memcpy(savedbuf, aligned_mcu_data, sizeof(savedbuf));
> + memmove(aligned_mcu_data, mcu_data, mcu_size);
> + }
> +
> /* write microcode via MSR 0x79 */
> native_wrmsr(MSR_IA32_UCODE_WRITE,
> - (unsigned long) mc_intel->bits,
> - (unsigned long) mc_intel->bits >> 16 >> 16);
> + lower_32_bits((unsigned long)aligned_mcu_data),
> + upper_32_bits((unsigned long)aligned_mcu_data));
> +
> + if (mcu_size) {
> + memmove(mcu_data, aligned_mcu_data, mcu_size);
> + memcpy(aligned_mcu_data, savedbuf, sizeof(savedbuf));
> + }
>
> /* get the current revision from MSR 0x8B */
> native_wrmsr(MSR_IA32_UCODE_REV, 0, 0);
> --
> 1.7.10.4
>
>
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-07 19:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-08 17:37 [PATCH 0/8] x86, microcode, intel: fixes and enhancements Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-09-08 17:37 ` [PATCH 1/8] x86, microcode, intel: forbid some incorrect metadata Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-05 17:34 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-05 19:37 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-05 21:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-05 21:49 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-06 5:15 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-09-08 17:37 ` [PATCH 2/8] x86, microcode, intel: don't update each HT core twice Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-20 13:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-20 18:24 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-28 17:31 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-31 18:43 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-01 11:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-01 19:20 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-04 15:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-09-08 17:37 ` [PATCH 3/8] x86, microcode, intel: clarify log messages Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-20 13:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-21 14:13 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-29 9:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-31 20:08 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-07 17:37 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-09-08 17:37 ` [PATCH 4/8] x86, microcode, intel: add error logging to early update driver Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-20 15:08 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-21 14:10 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-30 17:41 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-30 18:15 ` Joe Perches
2014-10-31 20:10 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-09-08 17:37 ` [PATCH 5/8] x86, microcode, intel: don't check extsig entry checksum Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-30 20:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-31 17:14 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-07 17:49 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-09-08 17:37 ` [PATCH 6/8] x86, microcode, intel: use cpuid explicitly instead of sync_core Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-07 17:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-07 18:40 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-07 19:48 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-09-08 17:37 ` [PATCH 7/8] x86, microcode, intel: guard against misaligned microcode data Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-09-18 0:48 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-07 19:59 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2014-11-07 22:54 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-07 23:48 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-08 21:57 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-11 10:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-11 16:57 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-11 17:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-11 19:54 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-12 12:31 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-13 0:18 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-13 11:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-15 23:10 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-24 17:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-25 13:29 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-09-08 17:37 ` [PATCH 8/8] x86, microcode, intel: defend apply_microcode_intel with BUG_ON Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-07 20:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-11-07 22:56 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-11-07 23:48 ` Borislav Petkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141107195905.GE5180@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome