4.9-stable patches

added patches:
	x86-microcode-intel-check-patch-signature-before-saving-microcode-for-early-loading.patch

diff --git a/queue-4.9/series b/queue-4.9/series
index c757c4136dc09c42d2cafb7a214d71e5e532cbc3..b2dd15f0f9b07608c4d90c707c1085f3a7f4dd74 100644 (file)
--- a/queue-4.9/series
+++ b/queue-4.9/series
@@ -44,3 +44,4 @@ mac80211-minstrel-remove-deferred-sampling-code.patch
 mac80211-minstrel-fix-tx-status-processing-corner-case.patch
 mac80211-free-sta-in-sta_info_insert_finish-on-errors.patch
 s390-cpum_sf.c-fix-file-permission-for-cpum_sfb_size.patch
+x86-microcode-intel-check-patch-signature-before-saving-microcode-for-early-loading.patch

diff --git a/queue-4.9/x86-microcode-intel-check-patch-signature-before-saving-microcode-for-early-loading.patch b/queue-4.9/x86-microcode-intel-check-patch-signature-before-saving-microcode-for-early-loading.patch
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..af5f181
--- /dev/null
+++ b/queue-4.9/x86-microcode-intel-check-patch-signature-before-saving-microcode-for-early-loading.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
+From 1a371e67dc77125736cc56d3a0893f06b75855b6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
+Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:59:23 +0800
+Subject: x86/microcode/intel: Check patch signature before saving microcode for early loading
+
+From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
+
+commit 1a371e67dc77125736cc56d3a0893f06b75855b6 upstream.
+
+Currently, scan_microcode() leverages microcode_matches() to check
+if the microcode matches the CPU by comparing the family and model.
+However, the processor stepping and flags of the microcode signature
+should also be considered when saving a microcode patch for early
+update.
+
+Use find_matching_signature() in scan_microcode() and get rid of the
+now-unused microcode_matches() which is a good cleanup in itself.
+
+Complete the verification of the patch being saved for early loading in
+save_microcode_patch() directly. This needs to be done there too because
+save_mc_for_early() will call save_microcode_patch() too.
+
+The second reason why this needs to be done is because the loader still
+tries to support, at least hypothetically, mixed-steppings systems and
+thus adds all patches to the cache that belong to the same CPU model
+albeit with different steppings.
+
+For example:
+
+  microcode: CPU: sig=0x906ec, pf=0x2, rev=0xd6
+  microcode: mc_saved[0]: sig=0x906e9, pf=0x2a, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
+  microcode: mc_saved[1]: sig=0x906ea, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19000, date = 2020-04-27
+  microcode: mc_saved[2]: sig=0x906eb, pf=0x2, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
+  microcode: mc_saved[3]: sig=0x906ec, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19000, date = 2020-04-27
+  microcode: mc_saved[4]: sig=0x906ed, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23
+
+The patch which is being saved for early loading, however, can only be
+the one which fits the CPU this runs on so do the signature verification
+before saving.
+
+ [ bp: Do signature verification in save_microcode_patch()
+       and rewrite commit message. ]
+
+Fixes: ec400ddeff20 ("x86/microcode_intel_early.c: Early update ucode on Intel's CPU")
+Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
+Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
+Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
+Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208535
+Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201113015923.13960-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com
+Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
+
+
+---
+ arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c |   48 +---------------------------------
+ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
++++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+@@ -147,51 +147,6 @@ load_microcode(struct mc_saved_data *mcs
+       }
+ }
+ 
+-/*
+- * Given CPU signature and a microcode patch, this function finds if the
+- * microcode patch has matching family and model with the CPU.
+- */
+-static enum ucode_state
+-matching_model_microcode(struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header,
+-                      unsigned long sig)
+-{
+-      unsigned int fam, model;
+-      unsigned int fam_ucode, model_ucode;
+-      struct extended_sigtable *ext_header;
+-      unsigned long total_size = get_totalsize(mc_header);
+-      unsigned long data_size = get_datasize(mc_header);
+-      int ext_sigcount, i;
+-      struct extended_signature *ext_sig;
+-
+-      fam   = x86_family(sig);
+-      model = x86_model(sig);
+-
+-      fam_ucode   = x86_family(mc_header->sig);
+-      model_ucode = x86_model(mc_header->sig);
+-
+-      if (fam == fam_ucode && model == model_ucode)
+-              return UCODE_OK;
+-
+-      /* Look for ext. headers: */
+-      if (total_size <= data_size + MC_HEADER_SIZE)
+-              return UCODE_NFOUND;
+-
+-      ext_header   = (void *) mc_header + data_size + MC_HEADER_SIZE;
+-      ext_sig      = (void *)ext_header + EXT_HEADER_SIZE;
+-      ext_sigcount = ext_header->count;
+-
+-      for (i = 0; i < ext_sigcount; i++) {
+-              fam_ucode   = x86_family(ext_sig->sig);
+-              model_ucode = x86_model(ext_sig->sig);
+-
+-              if (fam == fam_ucode && model == model_ucode)
+-                      return UCODE_OK;
+-
+-              ext_sig++;
+-      }
+-      return UCODE_NFOUND;
+-}
+-
+ static int
+ save_microcode(struct mc_saved_data *mcs,
+              struct microcode_intel **mc_saved_src,
+@@ -332,7 +287,8 @@ get_matching_model_microcode(unsigned lo
+                * the platform, we need to find and save microcode patches
+                * with the same family and model as the BSP.
+                */
+-              if (matching_model_microcode(mc_header, uci->cpu_sig.sig) != UCODE_OK) {
++              if (!find_matching_signature(mc_header, uci->cpu_sig.sig,
++                                           uci->cpu_sig.pf)) {
+                       ucode_ptr += mc_size;
+                       continue;
+               }