diff mbox

sparc64: Swap registers for fault code and address in mna trap

Message ID TYXPR01MB0589F696D4EADB7B1244D97A99570@TYXPR01MB0589.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
State Changes Requested
Delegated to: David Miller
Headers show

Commit Message

神田　尚 June 17, 2016, 1:49 a.m. UTC 
From: "Hisashi Kanda" <hikanda@zlab.co.jp>

This bug may occur in the following.

user_rtt_fill_64bit          <= If mna trap occurred, call do_mna
+-> do_mna                   <= Mistake storing registers for fault code and address
    +-> winfix_mna
        +-> user_rtt_fill_fixup  <= Put fault address into thread_info->flag's TI_FAULT_CODE 
            +-> do_sparc64_fault() <= If fault address has FAULT_CODE_ITLB and FAULT_CODE_DTLB bits, call BUG()
                +-> BUG()

If mna trap occured in user_rtt_fill_64bit, then do_mna is called.
So, fault address is loaded into %g4, and fault code is loaded into %g5 in do_mna.
But, %g4 is stored into thread_info->flag's TI_FAULT_CODE, and
%g5 is stored into thread_info->flag's TI_FAULT_ADDR in user_rtt_fill_fixup.
This is a mistake. If fault address has FAULT_CODE_ITLB and 
FAULT_CODE_DTLB bits, BUG() may occur in do_sparc64_fault().
Therefore, %g4, %g5 should be swapped in winfix_mna.

Signed-off-by: Hisashi Kanda <hikanda@zlab.co.jp>

---
This patch is applied to linux-4.7 rc3

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

David Miller June 18, 2016, 6:12 a.m. UTC | #1 
From: 神田　尚 <hikanda@zlab.co.jp>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:49:11 +0000

> This bug may occur in the following.
>
> user_rtt_fill_64bit          <= If mna trap occurred, call do_mna
> +-> do_mna                   <= Mistake storing registers for fault code and address
>     +-> winfix_mna
>         +-> user_rtt_fill_fixup  <= Put fault address into thread_info->flag's TI_FAULT_CODE 
>             +-> do_sparc64_fault() <= If fault address has FAULT_CODE_ITLB and FAULT_CODE_DTLB bits, call BUG()
>                 +-> BUG()

We should not be invoking do_sparc64_fault() in this case.

Instead, we call either sun4v_do_mna() or mem_address_unaligned().

Neither of which care about the values stored in the thread's fault
address and code.

If you can really trigger this code path, please post the kernel log
backtrace that happens when the BUG() triggers.  That way we can
figure out what the real problem is.

Your patch is also wrong for other reasons, it would break the
unaligned trap code paths that don't go via user_rtt_fill_64bit
fixups.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
神田　尚 June 21, 2016, 10:36 a.m. UTC | #2 
Hi, David

Thank you for your reply.

> If you can really trigger this code path, please post the kernel log
> backtrace that happens when the BUG() triggers.  That way we can
> figure out what the real problem is.
I'm sorry I cannot show the information. I don't have now.
In fact, BUG() in do_sparc64_fault occurred in modified version
of linux-2.6.25.8 on SPARC64VIIIfx. I'm misunderstanding that
the same problem remains in the latest. 

> Your patch is also wrong for other reasons, it would break the
> unaligned trap code paths that don't go via user_rtt_fill_64bit
> fixups.
And from the first, I was wrong. I got it.

I have some questions.
I think that if %tl > 1, winfix_mna will be called. Is it correct?
And, the call trace is never occurred?
David Miller June 22, 2016, 6:48 p.m. UTC | #3 
From: 神田　尚 <hikanda@zlab.co.jp>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:36:42 +0000

> Hi, David
> 
> Thank you for your reply.
> 
>> If you can really trigger this code path, please post the kernel log
>> backtrace that happens when the BUG() triggers.  That way we can
>> figure out what the real problem is.
> I'm sorry I cannot show the information. I don't have now.
> In fact, BUG() in do_sparc64_fault occurred in modified version
> of linux-2.6.25.8 on SPARC64VIIIfx. I'm misunderstanding that
> the same problem remains in the latest.

You have to show me that the calltrace occurs with the latest
kernel.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/misctrap.S b/arch/sparc/kernel/misctrap.S
index 34b4933..0cfb367 100644
--- a/arch/sparc/kernel/misctrap.S
+++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/misctrap.S
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@  do_mna:
 	ldxa		[%g3] ASI_DMMU, %g5
 	stxa		%g0, [%g3] ASI_DMMU	! Clear FaultValid bit
 	membar		#Sync
-	bgu,pn		%icc, winfix_mna
+	bgu,pn		%icc, winfix_mna_swap
 	 rdpr		%tpc, %g3
 
 1:	sethi		%hi(109f), %g7
diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/winfixup.S b/arch/sparc/kernel/winfixup.S
index 855019a..8359a1b 100644
--- a/arch/sparc/kernel/winfixup.S
+++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/winfixup.S
@@ -103,6 +103,11 @@  spill_fixup_dax:
 	 add	%sp, PTREGS_OFF, %o0
 	ba,a,pt	%xcc, rtrap
 
+winfix_mna_swap:
+	mov	%g4, %g3	! swapping %g4 and %g5 using %g3
+	mov	%g5, %g4	! %g4=SFSR
+	mov	%g3, %g5	! %g5=SFAR
+	rdpr	%tpc, %g3
 winfix_mna:
 	andn	%g3, 0x7f, %g3
 	add	%g3, 0x78, %g3