Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:6744:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id w4csp173221pxu; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 03:43:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyyDQ/dvPHgMD8aqz3+8R7uNhlHjRgPm99fXM9Igvq9O/DpI0zwf/LJblZOgC7wlDUHE5Sf X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:b45:: with SMTP id v5mr4639319ejg.353.1601981037829; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 03:43:57 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1601981037; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=lTPzVuYao1CZ2rsZNGIfTZqR4N5ohHP8OOl/+VXKhRkCu0D/ecO1Ni3vTiR7CWYRQZ EBt0hhJEUnTp7SZw7g1RQc41S7vjy4c3sP8mRWuanQc1/vAYFO515mQSUUNBWdeDfIIw WcAxdvPjcg7NcQQzJvHVEnYQ5zLr3v03KLmbv50HUl3pMZOb1tu1GmKCtVgZuUvPhL1r FukQDd9GDwTApFGkIx0SkUmcPT+KAw+wLRhPr+r5Q3AoXWUdDbxVoUkVp6fEcIGCAoi1 V+fYfm5xtaU8QUon8ZlUBN6ReqiPZctSeQyiKVqn6qZV6C51/TrvROth0kDfB1KiYKpi VJvQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=OMQIsSb/NlbJFlSs08r5f/Yd+xE+/+H27b2btWTExpc=; b=g6hv5z/n0zWDzIj8/87Qr1Q5Ukjk0lAdQXgPDjgiucp8Z3nbRHOEs1YMVSm/CAMWy0 u2E2A3XFNkoG1Kk7pKIs1BneSrjlTgSq7q869ITNcMkiL9nAc8AM9mmWgy4yI3r/x4Iy A5VntBdoRVj/U5riHKzjGIcdMezMswEan14xE+8QG6GYMTj7fZyPh5jc3SBZ81buF7yE ThHPwLnBtkuiZLWdOA/cBGMUxpdu/GScbPDJwcmihUcB4LE44JcoxSwoF/c6fw3qRxk0 vzD79hoo2NM+oT+MQ59CjspAUEel8EkOAr0+bFTOJ1eElkpD6LJaHmEDef/YGZcuHiBh wWDw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k7si1771657ejp.191.2020.10.06.03.43.31; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 03:43:57 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725906AbgJFKnC (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 6 Oct 2020 06:43:02 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:44316 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725891AbgJFKnC (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2020 06:43:02 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D0BD113E; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 03:43:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD5AF3F66B; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 03:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:43:14 +0100 From: Dave Martin To: Catalin Marinas Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeremy Linton , davem@davemloft.net, broonie@kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , ardb@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [BUG][PATCH] crypto: arm64: Avoid indirect branch to bti_c Message-ID: <20201006104313.GX6642@arm.com> References: <20201006034854.2277538-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <20201006082748.GB25305@willie-the-truck> <20201006100121.GW6642@arm.com> <20201006102507.GA19213@gaia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201006102507.GA19213@gaia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 11:25:11AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 11:01:21AM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 09:27:48AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 10:48:54PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > > > The AES code uses a 'br x7' as part of a function called by > > > > a macro. That branch needs a bti_j as a target. This results > > > > in a panic as seen below. Instead of trying to replace the branch > > > > target with a bti_jc, lets replace the indirect branch with a > > > > bl/ret, bl sequence that can target the existing bti_c. > > > > > > > > Bad mode in Synchronous Abort handler detected on CPU1, code 0x34000003 -- BTI > > > > CPU: 1 PID: 265 Comm: cryptomgr_test Not tainted 5.8.11-300.fc33.aarch64 #1 > > > > pstate: 20400c05 (nzCv daif +PAN -UAO BTYPE=j-) > > > > pc : aesbs_encrypt8+0x0/0x5f0 [aes_neon_bs] > > > > lr : aesbs_xts_encrypt+0x48/0xe0 [aes_neon_bs] > > > > sp : ffff80001052b730 > > > > > > > > aesbs_encrypt8+0x0/0x5f0 [aes_neon_bs] > > > > __xts_crypt+0xb0/0x2dc [aes_neon_bs] > > > > xts_encrypt+0x28/0x3c [aes_neon_bs] > > > > crypto_skcipher_encrypt+0x50/0x84 > > > > simd_skcipher_encrypt+0xc8/0xe0 > > > > crypto_skcipher_encrypt+0x50/0x84 > > > > test_skcipher_vec_cfg+0x224/0x5f0 > > > > test_skcipher+0xbc/0x120 > > > > alg_test_skcipher+0xa0/0x1b0 > > > > alg_test+0x3dc/0x47c > > > > cryptomgr_test+0x38/0x60 > > > > > > > > Fixes: commit 0e89640b640d ("crypto: arm64 - Use modern annotations for assembly functions") > > > > > > nit: the "commit" string shouldn't be here, and I think the linux-next > > > scripts will yell at us if we don't remove it. > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton > > > > --- > > > > arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S | 6 +++--- > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S b/arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S > > > > index b357164379f6..32f53ebe5e2c 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/crypto/aes-neonbs-core.S > > > > @@ -788,7 +788,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START_LOCAL(__xts_crypt8) > > > > > > > > 0: mov bskey, x21 > > > > mov rounds, x22 > > > > - br x7 > > > > + ret > > > > Dang, replied on an old version. > > Which I ignored (by default, when the kbuild test robot complains ;)). > > > Since this is logically a tail call, could we simply be using br x16 or > > br x17 for this? > > > > The architecture makes special provision for that so that the compiler > > can generate tail-calls. > > So a "br x16" is compatible with a bti_c landing pad. I think it makes > more sense to keep it as a tail call. Just to be clear, I'm happy either way, but I thought it would make sense to point this out. Normally, "bti j" would be used just for weird stuff like jump tables, but .S files all count as "weird stuff" to some extent -- so there are no hard and fast rules. Cheers ---Dave