Re: arm: Launching EFI-enabled arm32 Linux

[Adam Lackorzynski]

Hi Andre,

On Wed Sep 08, 2021 at 00:47:10 +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 01:25:04 +0200
> Adam Lackorzynski <adam@l4re.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Adam,
> 
> > On Mon Sep 06, 2021 at 16:34:03 +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
> > > On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 21:26:45 +0200
> > > Adam Lackorzynski <adam@l4re.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Adam,
> > >   
> > > > while trying to launch an EFI-enabled arm32 Linux binary (zImage) I
> > > > noticed I get an undefined instruction exception on the first
> > > > instruction. Now this is a bit special because Linux uses a nop
> > > > instruction there that also is a PE file signature ('MZ') such that the
> > > > CPU runs over it and the file is still recognized as a PE binary. Linux
> > > > uses 0x13105a4d (tstne r0, #0x4d000) as the instruction (see also
> > > > arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S and efi-header.S in Linux).
> > > > However, QEMU's instruction decoder will only recognize TST with bits
> > > > 12-15 being 0, which this instruction is not fullfilling, and thus the
> > > > undef exception. I guess other CPU implementations will allow this
> > > > encoding. So while investigating I was doing the following to make Linux
> > > > proceed. I also believe this was working in a previous version of QEMU.
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/target/arm/a32.decode b/target/arm/a32.decode
> > > > index fcd8cd4f7d..222553750e 100644
> > > > --- a/target/arm/a32.decode
> > > > +++ b/target/arm/a32.decode
> > > > @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ ADD_rri          .... 001 0100 . .... .... 
> > > > ............       @s_rri_rot
> > > >  ADC_rri          .... 001 0101 . .... .... ............       
> > > > @s_rri_rot
> > > >  SBC_rri          .... 001 0110 . .... .... ............       
> > > > @s_rri_rot
> > > >  RSC_rri          .... 001 0111 . .... .... ............       
> > > > @s_rri_rot
> > > > -TST_xri          .... 001 1000 1 .... 0000 ............       
> > > > @S_xri_rot
> > > > +TST_xri          .... 001 1000 1 .... ---- ............       
> > > > @S_xri_rot
> > > >  TEQ_xri          .... 001 1001 1 .... 0000 ............       
> > > > @S_xri_rot
> > > >  CMP_xri          .... 001 1010 1 .... 0000 ............       
> > > > @S_xri_rot
> > > >  CMN_xri          .... 001 1011 1 .... 0000 ............       
> > > > @S_xri_rot
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Any thoughts on this?  
> > > 
> > > thanks for the report, I was looking at this and have a kernel patch
> > > to fix this properly as Peter suggested. And while I agree on the
> > > problem, I was struggling to reproduce this in reality: both with
> > > -kernel and when booting through U-Boot the "Z" bit is set, which lets
> > > QEMU not even bother about the rest of the encoding - the condition
> > > flags don't match, so it proceeds. If I change the __nop to use "tsteq",
> > > I see it hanging due to the missing exception handler, but not with
> > > "tstne".
> > > So can you say how you spotted this issue? This would be needed as a
> > > justification for patching the guts of the ARM Linux kernel port.  
> > 
> > Good point with the condition flags. I'm doing this with our own vmm
> > where I'm loading the binary directly as the payload (as mandated by the
> > header), and where psr is set to a defined value with all flags cleared.
> 
> Right, I was thinking something like this.
> 
> > If I set the Z bit than it also works (of course).
> > Looking a bit around in QEMU as well as u-boot I it looks like this is
> > rather by luck how flags are set.
> 
> Yes, the kernel boot protocol doesn't say anything about the condition
> flags, so any combination would be valid and we were just lucky before.
> I did also test on an Cortex-A7 and A53, both ignore bits [15:12] (so
> execute the instruction as if they were 0), which explains why it works
> on real hardware.
> 
> > Thanks for doing the Linux patch, I'll scrap mine, and also thanks to
> > Peter for the idea!
> 
> Oh, didn't want to cut you off, if you want to have the commit: be my
> guest!
> Otherwise I will send something tomorrow, with a Reported-by: to you.

No, that's fine, I'm happy this is taken care of :)

> Grüße an die Elbe!

Danke, Grüße zurück :-)


Adam