On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 04:05:29PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 07:28:51PM -0700, Pawan Gupta wrote: > > To keep things simple, can this stay in cpu/common.c? > > I know, right? > > The gullible maintainer should simply take your half-baked patch so that > you can check off that box and then he can clean it up later. I am sorry if it felt like that, its really not my intention. I did also say: "And if there is a compelling reason, I am willing to make the required changes." I was genuinely curious about why not to use cpu/common.c for mmio. cpu/common.c is heavily used for bugs infrastructure. It already has the affected tables, bug enumerations and helper functions for previous bugs. Maybe it needs a cleanup as a whole. > See if this works: Thanks for this. > --- > diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/processor_mmio_stale_data.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/processor_mmio_stale_data.rst > index 9393c50b5afc..14cd3c6ddec6 100644 > --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/processor_mmio_stale_data.rst > +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/processor_mmio_stale_data.rst > @@ -230,6 +230,21 @@ The possible values in this file are: > * - 'Mitigation: Clear CPU buffers' > - The processor is vulnerable and the CPU buffer clearing mitigation is > enabled. > + * - 'Unknown: CPU is beyond its servicing period' > + - The processor vulnerability status is unknown because it is > + out of Servicing period. Mitigation is not attempted. > + > + > +Definitions: > +------------ > + > +Servicing period: The process of providing functional and security > +updates to Intel processors or platforms, utilizing the Intel Platform > +Update (IPU) process or other similar mechanisms. > + > +End of Servicing Updates (ESU): ESU is the date at which Intel will no > +longer provide Servicing, such as through IPU or other similar update > +processes. ESU dates will typically be aligned to end of quarter. > > If the processor is vulnerable then the following information is appended to > the above information: > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h > index ea34cc31b047..fe66e94d7b86 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h > @@ -154,6 +154,7 @@ extern void clear_cpu_cap(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, unsigned int bit); > } while (0) > > #define setup_force_cpu_bug(bit) setup_force_cpu_cap(bit) > +#define setup_clear_cpu_bug(bit) setup_clear_cpu_cap(bit) > > #if defined(__clang__) && !defined(CONFIG_CC_HAS_ASM_GOTO) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h > index 5fe7f6c8a7a4..130cb46ecaf9 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h > @@ -454,7 +454,8 @@ > #define X86_BUG_TAA X86_BUG(22) /* CPU is affected by TSX Async Abort(TAA) */ > #define X86_BUG_ITLB_MULTIHIT X86_BUG(23) /* CPU may incur MCE during certain page attribute changes */ > #define X86_BUG_SRBDS X86_BUG(24) /* CPU may leak RNG bits if not mitigated */ > -#define X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA X86_BUG(25) /* CPU is affected by Processor MMIO Stale Data vulnerabilities */ > -#define X86_BUG_RETBLEED X86_BUG(26) /* CPU is affected by RETBleed */ > +#define X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN X86_BUG(25) /* CPU is too old and its MMIO Stale Data status is unknown */ > +#define X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA X86_BUG(26) /* CPU is affected by Processor MMIO Stale Data vulnerabilities */ > +#define X86_BUG_RETBLEED X86_BUG(27) /* CPU is affected by RETBleed */ > > #endif /* _ASM_X86_CPUFEATURES_H */ > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c > index 6454bc767f0f..a83d1c4265ae 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c > @@ -433,7 +433,8 @@ static void __init mmio_select_mitigation(void) > u64 ia32_cap; > > if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA) || > - cpu_mitigations_off()) { > + boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN) || > + cpu_mitigations_off()) { > mmio_mitigation = MMIO_MITIGATION_OFF; > return; > } > @@ -2247,6 +2248,9 @@ static ssize_t tsx_async_abort_show_state(char *buf) > > static ssize_t mmio_stale_data_show_state(char *buf) > { > + if (boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN)) > + return sysfs_emit(buf, "Unknown: CPU is beyond its servicing period\n"); > + > if (mmio_mitigation == MMIO_MITIGATION_OFF) > return sysfs_emit(buf, "%s\n", mmio_strings[mmio_mitigation]); > > @@ -2378,6 +2382,7 @@ static ssize_t cpu_show_common(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr > return srbds_show_state(buf); > > case X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA: > + case X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN: > return mmio_stale_data_show_state(buf); > > case X86_BUG_RETBLEED: > @@ -2437,7 +2442,10 @@ ssize_t cpu_show_srbds(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, char * > > ssize_t cpu_show_mmio_stale_data(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf) > { > - return cpu_show_common(dev, attr, buf, X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA); > + if (boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN)) > + return cpu_show_common(dev, attr, buf, X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN); > + else > + return cpu_show_common(dev, attr, buf, X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA); > } > > ssize_t cpu_show_retbleed(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf) > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c > index 736262a76a12..fb3e8576a3b4 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c > @@ -1356,9 +1356,13 @@ static void __init cpu_set_bug_bits(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) > * but for virtualization case check for ARCH_CAP MSR bits also, VMM may > * not want the guest to enumerate the bug. > */ > - if (cpu_matches(cpu_vuln_blacklist, MMIO) && > - !arch_cap_mmio_immune(ia32_cap)) > - setup_force_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA); > + if (boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN)) { This should be !boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN). Otherwise X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA will not be set on affected systems. > + if (cpu_matches(cpu_vuln_blacklist, MMIO) && > + !arch_cap_mmio_immune(ia32_cap)) { > + setup_clear_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN); Clearing X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN wont be required then. > + setup_force_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA); > + } > + } Does this look okay: - if (cpu_matches(cpu_vuln_blacklist, MMIO) && - !arch_cap_mmio_immune(ia32_cap)) - setup_force_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA); + if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN)) { + if (cpu_matches(cpu_vuln_blacklist, MMIO) && + !arch_cap_mmio_immune(ia32_cap)) { + setup_force_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_STALE_DATA); + } + } > if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_BTC_NO)) { > if (cpu_matches(cpu_vuln_blacklist, RETBLEED) || (ia32_cap & ARCH_CAP_RSBA)) > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c > index 663f6e6dd288..5b2508adc38a 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c > @@ -372,6 +372,10 @@ static void early_init_intel(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) > static void bsp_init_intel(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) > { > resctrl_cpu_detect(c); > + > + /* Set on older crap */ > + if (c->x86_model < INTEL_FAM6_IVYBRIDGE) > + setup_force_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_MMIO_UNKNOWN); Thanks for suggesting this approach.