On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:59:24PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
Yo,
Series is RFC, so not gonna review it in depth, just wanted to comment
on this particular patch.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 10:21:30PM -0800, debug@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Deepak Gupta <debug@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
This patch adds support for detecting zicfiss and zicfilp. zicfiss and zicfilp
stands for unprivleged integer spec extension for shadow stack and branch
tracking on indirect branches, respectively.
This patch looks for zicfiss and zicfilp in device tree and accordinlgy lights
up bit in cpu feature bitmap. Furthermore this patch adds detection utility
functions to return whether shadow stack or landing pads are supported by
cpu.
Signed-off-by: Deepak Gupta <debug@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h | 2 ++
arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h | 1 +
arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 2 ++
4 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h
index a418c3112cd6..216190731c55 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h
@@ -133,4 +133,22 @@ static __always_inline bool riscv_cpu_has_extension_unlikely(int cpu, const unsi
return __riscv_isa_extension_available(hart_isa[cpu].isa, ext);
}
+static inline bool cpu_supports_shadow_stack(void)
+{
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_USER_CFI
In passing, I don't see any reason for not using IS_ENABLED() here.
No reason. I should probably do that. More readable.
Thanks.
+ return riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, ZICFISS);
+#else
+ return false;
+#endif
+}
+
+static inline bool cpu_supports_indirect_br_lp_instr(void)
+{
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_USER_CFI
+ return riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, ZICFILP);
+#else
+ return false;
+#endif
+}
+
#endif
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
index 06d30526ef3b..918165cfb4fa 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
@@ -57,6 +57,8 @@
#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHPM 42
#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMSTATEEN 43
#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICOND 44
+#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICFISS 45
+#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICFILP 46
#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX 64
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h
index f19f861cda54..ee2f51787ff8 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
#include <vdso/processor.h>
#include <asm/ptrace.h>
+#include <asm/hwcap.h>
#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
#define DEFAULT_MAP_WINDOW (UL(1) << (MMAP_VA_BITS - 1))
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
index 98623393fd1f..16624bc9a46b 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -185,6 +185,8 @@ const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[] = {
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svinval, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL),
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svnapot, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVNAPOT),
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svpbmt, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVPBMT),
+ __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicfiss, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICFISS),
+ __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicfilp, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICFILP),
Anything you add to this array, you need to document in a dt-binding.
You mean Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
(or possibly any other yaml if needed?)
Also, you added these in the wrong place. There's a massive comment
before the array describing the order entries must be in, please take a
look.
I see the comment.
In my defense, looks like I missed it when I was rebasing.
Will fix it.
Thanks,
Conor.
};
const size_t riscv_isa_ext_count = ARRAY_SIZE(riscv_isa_ext);
--
2.43.0
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
