Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 22 Oct 2017 13:04:38 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86/AMD: Apply Erratum 688 fix when BIOS doesn't |
| |
* Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> > > Some F14h machines have an erratum which, "under a highly specific > and detailed set of internal timing conditions" can lead to skipping > instructions and rIP corruption. Add the fix for those machines when > their BIOS doesn't apply it or there simply isn't BIOS update for them. > > Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> > Tested-by: <mirh@protonmail.ch> > Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197285 > Cc: Sherry Hurwitz <sherry.hurwitz@amd.com> > Cc: Yazen Ghannam <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com> > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> > --- > arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c > index 458da8509b75..7ad1dfc8f40e 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c > @@ -27,6 +27,8 @@ static const struct pci_device_id amd_root_ids[] = { > {} > }; > > +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_CNB17H_F4 0x1704 > + > const struct pci_device_id amd_nb_misc_ids[] = { > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_K8_NB_MISC) }, > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_10H_NB_MISC) }, > @@ -37,6 +39,7 @@ const struct pci_device_id amd_nb_misc_ids[] = { > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_16H_NB_F3) }, > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_16H_M30H_NB_F3) }, > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_17H_DF_F3) }, > + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_CNB17H_F3) }, > {} > }; > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(amd_nb_misc_ids); > @@ -48,6 +51,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id amd_nb_link_ids[] = { > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_16H_NB_F4) }, > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_16H_M30H_NB_F4) }, > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_17H_DF_F4) }, > + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_CNB17H_F4) }, > {} > }; > > @@ -402,11 +406,46 @@ void amd_flush_garts(void) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(amd_flush_garts); > > +static void __fix_erratum_688(void *info) > +{ > +#define MSR_AMD64_IC_CFG 0xC0011021 > + > + msr_set_bit(MSR_AMD64_IC_CFG, 3); > + msr_set_bit(MSR_AMD64_IC_CFG, 14); > +} > + > +/* Apply erratum 688 fix so machines without a BIOS fix work. */ > +static __init void fix_erratum_688(void) > +{ > + struct pci_dev *F4; > + u32 val; > + > + if (boot_cpu_data.x86 != 0x14) > + return; > + > + if (!amd_northbridges.num) > + return; > + > + F4 = node_to_amd_nb(0)->link; > + if (!F4) > + return; > + > + if (pci_read_config_dword(F4, 0x164, &val)) > + return; > + > + if (val & BIT(2)) > + return; > + > + on_each_cpu(__fix_erratum_688, NULL, 0);
Any objections to me adding a printk message that we applied a fix?
pr_info("x86/cpu/AMD: CPU erratum 688 worked around\n");
or so?
That would also create some pressure for customers to prod manufacturers to prod BIOS makers to fix the erratum in a BIOS update or so.
Plus, in the unlikely event that the erratum was not applied due to some other erratum, or the erratum was mis-documented, we'd eventually discover that as well.
Thanks,
Ingo
| |