Re: [PATCH] arm64/efi: Do not call EFI runtime services preemptibly under SW PAN
Gus Bourg <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-efi,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.stable |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAKL=SEpvBqMjw2Ts4ODYHCJz0K1axwmtrUGKQEJeb_rvuAQk0A@mail.gmail.com> |
On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 4:04 AM Will Deacon <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 04:56:00PM +0300, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 7 Aug 2026, at 15:16, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 05:01:44PM -0700, gus bourg wrote: > > >> From: Gus Bourg <[email protected]> > > >> > > >> When PAN is emulated by switching TTBR0_EL1, arch_efi_call_virt_setup() > > >> installs the EFI mm into TTBR0_EL1 via uaccess_ttbr0_enable(), and only a > > >> return from exception ever puts it back: check_and_switch_context() skips > > >> the register write by design ("Defer TTBR0_EL1 setting for user threads to > > >> uaccess_enable() when emulating PAN"), and __switch_to() does not touch it > > >> either. switch_mm() updates only thread_info->ttbr0. > > >> > > >> Since commit a5baf582f4c0 ("arm64/efi: Call EFI runtime services without > > >> disabling preemption") the runtime call is preemptible, so the EFI worker > > >> can now be scheduled out inside that window. An involuntary preemption is > > >> harmless, because __swpan_entry_el1()/__swpan_exit_el1() save and restore > > >> the state around the exception. A voluntary reschedule is not: it performs > > >> no return from exception, so the worker resumes with another task's > > >> TTBR0_EL1 - or reserved_pg_dir - and the next efi_mm access takes a level 0 > > >> translation fault. > > >> > > >> There is such a preemption point in arch_efi_call_virt_setup() itself, > > >> immediately after the TTBR0 install: __efi_fpsimd_begin() -> > > >> kernel_neon_begin() -> put_cpu_fpsimd_context() -> local_bh_enable() -> > > >> preempt_check_resched(). > > > > > > Hmm, can we move the ttbr0 toggling until after __efi_fpsimd_begin() so > > > that this preemption point doesn't interfere? > > > > > > > Either that, or tweak the logic so that the switch is done eagerly in > > this particular case (untested): > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/context.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/context.c > > @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ > > * Defer TTBR0_EL1 setting for user threads to uaccess_enable() when > > * emulating PAN. > > */ > > - if (!system_uses_ttbr0_pan()) > > + if (!system_uses_ttbr0_pan() || mm_is_efi(mm)) > > cpu_switch_mm(mm->pgd, mm); > > } > > I think I'd prefer to avoid special-casing this, if we can. I was just > thinking of the diff below. > > Will Tested the v2 approach (__efi_fpsimd_begin() before uaccess_ttbr0_enable()) on the board that originally reproduced the oops: Khadas VIM3, Amlogic A311D (4x Cortex-A73 + 2x Cortex-A53, no FEAT_PAN, so CONFIG_ARM64_SW_TTBR0_PAN is in use), EDK2-based UEFI firmware, v7.0.12 plus this change alone (my prior workaround removed). Both firmware description modes were exercised (DeviceTree and ACPI boots of the same system): - 3,000,000 GetVariable calls (three concurrent readers) plus 200,000 GetTime calls per mode, under sustained CPU contention (busy-loop load on half the cores to force scheduling in the call window) - i.e. 6.4M calls total across the ACPI and DeviceTree boots of the same system - SetVariable create/write/delete round-trips in both modes - ~15 reboots/power cycles (ResetSystem) and clean shutdowns across the session Zero efi_call_rts faults and zero "Unable to handle kernel access to user memory" events; efivars and the EFI RTC remained functional throughout, and poweroff/reboot stayed clean. Under the unpatched preemptible path the same board faulted within thousands of calls with comparable contention, so this comfortably clears the reproduction threshold. Tested-by: gus bourg <[email protected]> > > --->8 > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c > index 30cd7f804398..0ec90fd1754e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c > @@ -184,6 +184,8 @@ void arch_efi_call_virt_setup(void) > efi_virtmap_load(); > } > > + __efi_fpsimd_begin(); > + > /* > * Enable access to the valid TTBR0_EL1 and invoke the errata > * workaround directly since there is no return from exception when > @@ -191,8 +193,6 @@ void arch_efi_call_virt_setup(void) > */ > uaccess_ttbr0_enable(); > post_ttbr_update_workaround(); > - > - __efi_fpsimd_begin(); > } > > void arch_efi_call_virt_teardown(void) >