[v8,14/19] arm64: exec: Adjust affinity for compat tasks with mismatched 32-bit EL0

Commit Message

Will Deacon June 2, 2021, 4:47 p.m. UTC

When exec'ing a 32-bit task on a system with mismatched support for
32-bit EL0, try to ensure that it starts life on a CPU that can actually
run it.

Similarly, when exec'ing a 64-bit task on such a system, try to restore
the old affinity mask if it was previously restricted.

Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <[e-mail]>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h |  6 ++----
 arch/arm64/kernel/process.c  | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Comments

Daniel Bristot de Oliveira June 3, 2021, 9:45 a.m. UTC | #1

On 6/2/21 6:47 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> When exec'ing a 32-bit task on a system with mismatched support for
> 32-bit EL0, try to ensure that it starts life on a CPU that can actually
> run it.
> 
> Similarly, when exec'ing a 64-bit task on such a system, try to restore
> the old affinity mask if it was previously restricted.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <[e-mail]>
> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <[e-mail]>
> ---

[...]

>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
> +int compat_elf_check_arch(const struct elf32_hdr *hdr)
> +{
> +	if (!system_supports_32bit_el0())
> +		return false;
> +
> +	if ((hdr)->e_machine != EM_ARM)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	if (!((hdr)->e_flags & EF_ARM_EABI_MASK))
> +		return false;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Prevent execve() of a 32-bit program from a deadline task
> +	 * if the restricted affinity mask would be inadmissible on an
> +	 * asymmetric system.
> +	 */
> +	return !static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0) ||
> +	       task_cpus_dl_admissible(current, system_32bit_el0_cpumask());
> +}
> +#endif

From the DL perspective:

Reviewed-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <[e-mail]>

Thanks!
-- Daniel

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h
index 8d1c8dcb87fd..97932fbf973d 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h
@@ -213,10 +213,8 @@  typedef compat_elf_greg_t		compat_elf_gregset_t[COMPAT_ELF_NGREG];
 
 /* AArch32 EABI. */
 #define EF_ARM_EABI_MASK		0xff000000
-#define compat_elf_check_arch(x)	(system_supports_32bit_el0() && \
-					 ((x)->e_machine == EM_ARM) && \
-					 ((x)->e_flags & EF_ARM_EABI_MASK))
-
+int compat_elf_check_arch(const struct elf32_hdr *);
+#define compat_elf_check_arch		compat_elf_check_arch
 #define compat_start_thread		compat_start_thread
 /*
  * Unlike the native SET_PERSONALITY macro, the compat version maintains
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
index f4a91bf1ce0c..3aea06fdd1f9 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ 
 #include <linux/mman.h>
 #include <linux/mm.h>
 #include <linux/nospec.h>
+#include <linux/sched.h>
 #include <linux/stddef.h>
 #include <linux/sysctl.h>
 #include <linux/unistd.h>
@@ -638,6 +639,28 @@  unsigned long arch_align_stack(unsigned long sp)
 	return sp & ~0xf;
 }
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
+int compat_elf_check_arch(const struct elf32_hdr *hdr)
+{
+	if (!system_supports_32bit_el0())
+		return false;
+
+	if ((hdr)->e_machine != EM_ARM)
+		return false;
+
+	if (!((hdr)->e_flags & EF_ARM_EABI_MASK))
+		return false;
+
+	/*
+	 * Prevent execve() of a 32-bit program from a deadline task
+	 * if the restricted affinity mask would be inadmissible on an
+	 * asymmetric system.
+	 */
+	return !static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0) ||
+	       task_cpus_dl_admissible(current, system_32bit_el0_cpumask());
+}
+#endif
+
 /*
  * Called from setup_new_exec() after (COMPAT_)SET_PERSONALITY.
  */
@@ -647,8 +670,22 @@  void arch_setup_new_exec(void)
 
 	if (is_compat_task()) {
 		mmflags = MMCF_AARCH32;
-		if (static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0))
+
+		/*
+		 * Restrict the CPU affinity mask for a 32-bit task so that
+		 * it contains only 32-bit-capable CPUs.
+		 *
+		 * From the perspective of the task, this looks similar to
+		 * what would happen if the 64-bit-only CPUs were hot-unplugged
+		 * at the point of execve(), although we try a bit harder to
+		 * honour the cpuset hierarchy.
+		 */
+		if (static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0)) {
+			force_compatible_cpus_allowed_ptr(current);
 			set_tsk_thread_flag(current, TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME);
+		}
+	} else if (static_branch_unlikely(&arm64_mismatched_32bit_el0)) {
+		relax_compatible_cpus_allowed_ptr(current);
 	}
 
 	current->mm->context.flags = mmflags;