Message ID | 20230410225936.8940-8-chang.seok.bae@intel.com |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers | show |
Series | x86: Support Key Locker | expand |
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 03:59:31PM -0700, Chang S. Bae wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h > index e85dfb6c1524..820ac29c06d9 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h > @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ > > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > > +#include <asm/processor.h> > #include <linux/bits.h> > #include <asm/fpu/types.h> > > @@ -28,5 +29,13 @@ struct iwkey { > #define KEYLOCKER_CPUID_EBX_WIDE BIT(2) > #define KEYLOCKER_CPUID_EBX_BACKUP BIT(4) > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER > +void setup_keylocker(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c); > +void destroy_keylocker_data(void); > +#else > +#define setup_keylocker(c) do { } while (0) > +#define destroy_keylocker_data() do { } while (0) > +#endif Shouldn't the !CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER stubs be static inline functions instead of macros, so that type checking works? - Eric
On 5/5/2023 4:05 PM, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 03:59:31PM -0700, Chang S. Bae wrote: >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER >> +void setup_keylocker(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c); >> +void destroy_keylocker_data(void); >> +#else >> +#define setup_keylocker(c) do { } while (0) >> +#define destroy_keylocker_data() do { } while (0) >> +#endif > > Shouldn't the !CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER stubs be static inline functions instead of > macros, so that type checking works? I think either way works here. This macro is just for nothing. Thanks, Chang
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c b/arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c ... > +void __init destroy_keylocker_data(void) > +{ > + memset(&kl_setup.key, KEY_DESTROY, sizeof(kl_setup.key)); > +} That's a special value for garbage collected keyring keys assigned a keytype of ".dead". memzero() or memzero_explicit() might be better for this use case.
On 5/8/2023 12:18 PM, Elliott, Robert (Servers) wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c b/arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c > ... >> +void __init destroy_keylocker_data(void) >> +{ >> + memset(&kl_setup.key, KEY_DESTROY, sizeof(kl_setup.key)); >> +} > > That's a special value for garbage collected keyring keys assigned > a keytype of ".dead". memzero() or memzero_explicit() might be better > for this use case. memzero() looks to be the same as memset() in x86: $ git grep memzero arch/x86/ | grep define arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.c:#define memzero(s, n) memset((s), 0, (n)) Instead, memzero_explicit() looks to be about the right call here: /** * memzero_explicit - Fill a region of memory (e.g. sensitive * keying data) with 0s. ... * Note: usually using memset() is just fine (!), but in cases * where clearing out _local_ data at the end of a scope is * necessary, memzero_explicit() should be used instead in * order to prevent the compiler from optimising away zeroing. ... Then, void __init destroy_keylocker_data(void) { memzero_explicit(&kl_setup.key, sizeof(kl_setup.key)); } Thanks, Chang
On 5/8/23 11:18, Chang S. Bae wrote: > On 5/5/2023 4:05 PM, Eric Biggers wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 03:59:31PM -0700, Chang S. Bae wrote: >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER >>> +void setup_keylocker(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c); >>> +void destroy_keylocker_data(void); >>> +#else >>> +#define setup_keylocker(c) do { } while (0) >>> +#define destroy_keylocker_data() do { } while (0) >>> +#endif >> >> Shouldn't the !CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER stubs be static inline functions >> instead of >> macros, so that type checking works? > > I think either way works here. This macro is just for nothing. Chang, I do prefer the 'static inline' as a general rule. Think of this: static inline void setup_keylocker(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) {} versus: #define setup_keylocker(c) do { } while (0) Imagine some dope does: char c; ... setup_keylocker(c); With the macro, they'll get no type warning. The inline actually makes it easier to find bugs because folks will get _some_ type checking no matter how they compile the code.
On 5/8/2023 2:56 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 5/8/23 11:18, Chang S. Bae wrote: >> On 5/5/2023 4:05 PM, Eric Biggers wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 03:59:31PM -0700, Chang S. Bae wrote: >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER >>>> +void setup_keylocker(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c); >>>> +void destroy_keylocker_data(void); >>>> +#else >>>> +#define setup_keylocker(c) do { } while (0) >>>> +#define destroy_keylocker_data() do { } while (0) >>>> +#endif >>> >>> Shouldn't the !CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER stubs be static inline functions >>> instead of >>> macros, so that type checking works? >> >> I think either way works here. This macro is just for nothing. > > Chang, I do prefer the 'static inline' as a general rule. Think of this: > > static inline void setup_keylocker(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) {} > > versus: > > #define setup_keylocker(c) do { } while (0) > > Imagine some dope does: > > char c; > ... > setup_keylocker(c); > > With the macro, they'll get no type warning. The inline actually makes > it easier to find bugs because folks will get _some_ type checking no > matter how they compile the code. Ah, when the prototype with one or more arguments, 'static inline' allows the check. Then it is not an 'either-way' thing. Looking at the x86 code, there are some seemingly related: $ git grep "do { } while (0)" arch/x86 | grep -v "()" arch/x86/include/asm/kprobes.h:#define flush_insn_slot(p) do { } while (0) arch/x86/include/asm/mc146818rtc.h:#define lock_cmos(reg) do { } while (0) arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h:#define flush_tlb_fix_spurious_fault(vma, address, ptep) do { } while (0) arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h:#define init_task_preempt_count(p) do { } while (0) arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.h:#define ASSERT(x) do { } while (0) arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h:#define pgprintk(x...) do { } while (0) arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h:#define rmap_printk(x...) do { } while (0) arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h:#define MMU_WARN_ON(x) do { } while (0) Now I feel owed for some potential cleanup work. Thanks, Chang
On 5/8/23 17:31, Chang S. Bae wrote: >> With the macro, they'll get no type warning. The inline actually makes >> it easier to find bugs because folks will get _some_ type checking no >> matter how they compile the code. > > Ah, when the prototype with one or more arguments, 'static inline' > allows the check. Then it is not an 'either-way' thing. > > Looking at the x86 code, there are some seemingly related: > > $ git grep "do { } while (0)" arch/x86 | grep -v "()" ... Right. It's not a hard and fast rule. We certainly take code either way and there can be real reasons to do it one way versus the other.
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h index e85dfb6c1524..820ac29c06d9 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ +#include <asm/processor.h> #include <linux/bits.h> #include <asm/fpu/types.h> @@ -28,5 +29,13 @@ struct iwkey { #define KEYLOCKER_CPUID_EBX_WIDE BIT(2) #define KEYLOCKER_CPUID_EBX_BACKUP BIT(4) +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER +void setup_keylocker(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c); +void destroy_keylocker_data(void); +#else +#define setup_keylocker(c) do { } while (0) +#define destroy_keylocker_data() do { } while (0) +#endif + #endif /*__ASSEMBLY__ */ #endif /* _ASM_KEYLOCKER_H */ diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile b/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile index b366641703e3..20babbaf8c0c 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS) += perf_regs.o obj-$(CONFIG_TRACING) += tracepoint.o obj-$(CONFIG_SCHED_MC_PRIO) += itmt.o obj-$(CONFIG_X86_UMIP) += umip.o +obj-$(CONFIG_X86_KEYLOCKER) += keylocker.o obj-$(CONFIG_UNWINDER_ORC) += unwind_orc.o obj-$(CONFIG_UNWINDER_FRAME_POINTER) += unwind_frame.o diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c index 3ea06b0b4570..a1edd5997e0a 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c @@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ #include <asm/microcode_intel.h> #include <asm/intel-family.h> #include <asm/cpu_device_id.h> +#include <asm/keylocker.h> + #include <asm/uv/uv.h> #include <asm/sigframe.h> #include <asm/traps.h> @@ -1874,10 +1876,11 @@ static void identify_cpu(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) /* Disable the PN if appropriate */ squash_the_stupid_serial_number(c); - /* Set up SMEP/SMAP/UMIP */ + /* Setup various Intel-specific CPU security features */ setup_smep(c); setup_smap(c); setup_umip(c); + setup_keylocker(c); /* Enable FSGSBASE instructions if available. */ if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_FSGSBASE)) { diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c b/arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..2519102f72f1 --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only + +/* + * Setup Key Locker feature and support internal wrapping key + * management. + */ + +#include <linux/random.h> +#include <linux/poison.h> + +#include <asm/fpu/api.h> +#include <asm/keylocker.h> +#include <asm/tlbflush.h> + +static __initdata struct keylocker_setup_data { + struct iwkey key; +} kl_setup; + +static void __init generate_keylocker_data(void) +{ + get_random_bytes(&kl_setup.key.integrity_key, sizeof(kl_setup.key.integrity_key)); + get_random_bytes(&kl_setup.key.encryption_key, sizeof(kl_setup.key.encryption_key)); +} + +void __init destroy_keylocker_data(void) +{ + memset(&kl_setup.key, KEY_DESTROY, sizeof(kl_setup.key)); +} + +static void __init load_keylocker(void) +{ + kernel_fpu_begin(); + load_xmm_iwkey(&kl_setup.key); + kernel_fpu_end(); +} + +/** + * setup_keylocker - Enable the feature. + * @c: A pointer to struct cpuinfo_x86 + */ +void __ref setup_keylocker(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) +{ + if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_KEYLOCKER)) + goto out; + + if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)) { + pr_debug("x86/keylocker: Not compatible with a hypervisor.\n"); + goto disable; + } + + cr4_set_bits(X86_CR4_KEYLOCKER); + + if (c == &boot_cpu_data) { + u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx; + + cpuid_count(KEYLOCKER_CPUID, 0, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx); + /* + * Check the feature readiness via CPUID. Note that the + * CPUID AESKLE bit is conditionally set only when CR4.KL + * is set. + */ + if (!(ebx & KEYLOCKER_CPUID_EBX_AESKLE) || + !(eax & KEYLOCKER_CPUID_EAX_SUPERVISOR)) { + pr_debug("x86/keylocker: Not fully supported.\n"); + goto disable; + } + + generate_keylocker_data(); + } + + load_keylocker(); + + pr_info_once("x86/keylocker: Enabled.\n"); + return; + +disable: + setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_KEYLOCKER); + pr_info_once("x86/keylocker: Disabled.\n"); +out: + /* Make sure the feature disabled for kexec-reboot. */ + cr4_clear_bits(X86_CR4_KEYLOCKER); +} diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c index 851477f7d728..880ed9cc8c53 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@ #include <asm/hw_irq.h> #include <asm/stackprotector.h> #include <asm/sev.h> +#include <asm/keylocker.h> /* representing HT siblings of each logical CPU */ DEFINE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(cpumask_var_t, cpu_sibling_map); @@ -1500,6 +1501,7 @@ void __init native_smp_cpus_done(unsigned int max_cpus) nmi_selftest(); impress_friends(); cache_aps_init(); + destroy_keylocker_data(); } static int __initdata setup_possible_cpus = -1;