From: Pavan Kondeti <pavan.kondeti@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Pavan Kondeti <pavan.kondeti@oss.qualcomm.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
rsalveti@oss.qualcomm.com
Subject: Re: Alternative to arm64.nopauth cmdline for disabling Pointer Authentication
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 22:25:43 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <33ab9112-39c5-4dba-9e56-089b7e8a7243@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aTF42v5dpTuCe7r3@J2N7QTR9R3>
On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 12:04:42PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi Pavan, Marc,
>
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 04:06:12PM +0530, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 09:15:29AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > On Thu, 04 Dec 2025 04:07:15 +0000,
> > > Pavan Kondeti <pavan.kondeti@oss.qualcomm.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > The pointer authentication feature (PAuth) is only supported on
> > > > 0-3 CPUs but it is not supported on 4-7 CPUS on QCS8300.
>
> > > On what grounds? Hardware incompatibility? I seriously doubt it,
> > > since nobody glues pre-8.3 CPUs to anything more modern.
>
> Marc, it seems like that's exactly that's happened here. :/
>
> > I see that Linux runs at EL2 and AA64ISAR1 register values on CPU#0
> > (A78) indicates that PAuth is supported but not for CPU#4 (A55). I am
> > told, there are no other controls outside EL2 (trap) to manipulate
> > this feature. So, I am assuming that this is indeed reflecting the HW.
>
> Cortex-A78 doesn't have pointer authentication, but Cortex-A78C does, so
> maybe you actually have Cortex-A78C?
>
> What are the MIDRs on this SoC? e.g. the output of:
>
> cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/regs/identification/midr_el1 | sort | uniq
>
> If this SoC has both Cortex-A78C and Cortex-A55, that's a rather
> unfortunate combination that should have been caught at the SoC design
> phase, as Marc alluded to.
Yes. The MIDR register indicate the same. A78C + A55
root@v8a-arm64:~# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/regs/identification/midr_el1
0x00000000410fd4b2
0x00000000410fd4b2
0x00000000410fd4b2
0x00000000410fd4b2
0x00000000412fd050
0x00000000412fd050
0x00000000412fd050
0x00000000412fd050
>
> [...]
>
> > > > This patch [2] from Catalin adds a devicetree property under memory {}
> > > > to disable MTE.
>
> Catalin's patch was a bit different. It described whether the memory
> range supported tags (and was actually a property of the memory). That
> patch didn't make it into mainline AFAICT.
>
> [...]
>
> > I understand that this does not fall under errata but is
> > there a possiblity to introduce an Errata targeting CPU#0 MIDR and
> > disabling the Pointer authentication? I understand that if there is
> > another Qualcomm SoC that exists with all CPUs supporting pointer
> > authentication with same MIDR, we may be disabling the feature but this
> > is something I can check internally.
>
> I strongly suspect we cannot use the MIDR for this. Per:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=53a52a0ec7680287b170b36488203b5822e6da2d
>
> ... Qualcomm's Kryo {Prime,Gold,Silver} parts seem to identify
> themselves as Arm ltd implementations, and those will appear in other
> non-Qualcomm SoCs.
Thank you for explaining this. Agree that we can't use MIDR based
workaround here.
>
> Without know *exactly* which MIDRs you have on this part, we cannot say.
>
> Regardless, I strongly suspect that we have to live with the command
> line option for these parts.
>
Got it.
Thanks,
Pavan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-04 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-04 4:07 Pavan Kondeti
2025-12-04 9:15 ` Marc Zyngier
2025-12-04 10:36 ` Pavan Kondeti
2025-12-04 12:04 ` Mark Rutland
2025-12-04 16:55 ` Pavan Kondeti [this message]
2025-12-04 13:01 ` Marc Zyngier
2025-12-04 17:01 ` Pavan Kondeti
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=33ab9112-39c5-4dba-9e56-089b7e8a7243@quicinc.com \
--to=pavan.kondeti@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=rsalveti@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=will@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®