ARM64: Regression with commit e3067861ba66 ("arm64: add basic VMAP_STACK support")

[Ard Biesheuvel]

On 17 October 2017 at 10:29, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 08:30:54AM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 03:35:46PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> > On 16/10/17 15:26, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 03:12:45PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> > >> On 16/10/17 14:48, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> > >>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 09:17:23AM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
>> > >>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 05:03:44PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> > >>>>> On 10/10/17 16:45, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 10:27:25PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
>> > >>>>>>> I work mainline kernel on Hikey620 board, I find it's easily to
>> > >>>>>>> introduce the panic and report the log as below. So I bisect the kernel
>> > >>>>>>> and finally narrow down the commit e3067861ba66 ("arm64: add basic
>> > >>>>>>> VMAP_STACK support") which introduce this issue.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> I tried to remove 'select HAVE_ARCH_VMAP_STACK' from
>> > >>>>>>> arch/arm64/Kconfig, then I can see the panic issue will dismiss. So
>> > >>>>>>> could you check this and have insight for this issue?
>
>> > >>>> I enabled these debugging configs but cannot get clue from it; but
>> > >>>> occasionally found this issue is quite likely related with CA53 errata,
>> > >>>> especialy ERRATA_A53_855873 is the relative one. So I changed to use
>> > >>>> ARM-TF mainline code with ERRATA fixing, this issue can be dismissed.
>
>> > >>> Just to confirm, with the updated firmware you no longer see the issue?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I can't immediately see how that would be related.
>
>> > I guess the vmap addresses might tickle the "same L2 set" condition
>> > differently to when both stack and DMA buffer are linear map addresses.
>>
>> A bit more info for this.
>>
>> I can reproduce this memory abort panic, and the panic places are not
>> consistent; usually it's related with kmalloc address. Do you think
>> "VMAP_STACK" introduces much more operations for cache clean? If
>> so if might be in the same *set* with any other memory access (like
>> kmalloc operations), then trigger data abort.
>
> VMAP_STACK doesn't introduce any explicit cache maintenance, but it's
> possible that it causes more natural evictions.
>
> That might explain why it triggers the issue.
>
>> Hikey has CA53 CPUs is r3 version so it's luck can directly apply the
>> ERRATA 855873 in ARM-TF.
>>
>> BTW, in case I may mislead you guys, we should note there have another
>> two ERRATAs applied in ARM-TFv1.4 for Hikey:
>>
>> ERRATA_A53_836870               :=      1
>> ERRATA_A53_843419               :=      1
>
> Thanks for the extra info!
>
> AFAICT, erratum 836870 results in livelock rather than memory
> corruption, so I think we can ignore that.
>
> I'm a little worried by erratum 843419. The VMAP_STACK patches changed
> {adr,ldr}_this_cpu (and some users thereof), and it's possible we're
> managing to tickle that issue.
>
> If you still have an affected kernel, could you dump the output of:
>
> $ aarch64-linux-gnu-objdump -d vmlinux | grep -A 3 'ff[8c]:\s\+[a-f0-9]\+\s\+adrp'
>
> ... that would show us if there are any affected sequences.
>
> From a quick scan of my own vmlinux build from commit e3067861ba66, I
> didn't see any, but it's possible this depends on the config used.
>

The linker should take care of that: it scans the entire executable,
and inserts a veneer if an adrp happens to end up at a vulnerable
offset in the page.