arm64: documentation: document tagged pointer stack constraints

commit f0e421b1 upstream.

Some kernel features don't currently work if a task puts a non-zero
address tag in its stack pointer, frame pointer, or frame record entries
(FP, LR).

For example, with a tagged stack pointer, the kernel can't deliver
signals to the process, and the task is killed instead. As another
example, with a tagged frame pointer or frame records, perf fails to
generate call graphs or resolve symbols.

For now, just document these limitations, instead of finding and fixing
everything that doesn't work, as it's not known if anyone needs to use
tags in these places anyway.

In addition, as requested by Dave Martin, generalize the limitations
into a general kernel address tag policy, and refactor
tagged-pointers.txt to include it.

Fixes: d50240a5 ("arm64: mm: permit use of tagged pointers at EL0")
Reviewed-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt

@@ -11,24 +11,56 @@ in AArch64 Linux.
 The kernel configures the translation tables so that translations made
 via TTBR0 (i.e. userspace mappings) have the top byte (bits 63:56) of
 the virtual address ignored by the translation hardware. This frees up
-this byte for application use, with the following caveats:
+this byte for application use.
 
-	(1) The kernel requires that all user addresses passed to EL1
-	    are tagged with tag 0x00. This means that any syscall
-	    parameters containing user virtual addresses *must* have
-	    their top byte cleared before trapping to the kernel.
 
-	(2) Non-zero tags are not preserved when delivering signals.
-	    This means that signal handlers in applications making use
-	    of tags cannot rely on the tag information for user virtual
-	    addresses being maintained for fields inside siginfo_t.
-	    One exception to this rule is for signals raised in response
-	    to watchpoint debug exceptions, where the tag information
-	    will be preserved.
+Passing tagged addresses to the kernel
+--------------------------------------
 
-	(3) Special care should be taken when using tagged pointers,
-	    since it is likely that C compilers will not hazard two
-	    virtual addresses differing only in the upper byte.
+All interpretation of userspace memory addresses by the kernel assumes
+an address tag of 0x00.
+
+This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
+
+ - pointer arguments to system calls, including pointers in structures
+   passed to system calls,
+
+ - the stack pointer (sp), e.g. when interpreting it to deliver a
+   signal,
+
+ - the frame pointer (x29) and frame records, e.g. when interpreting
+   them to generate a backtrace or call graph.
+
+Using non-zero address tags in any of these locations may result in an
+error code being returned, a (fatal) signal being raised, or other modes
+of failure.
+
+For these reasons, passing non-zero address tags to the kernel via
+system calls is forbidden, and using a non-zero address tag for sp is
+strongly discouraged.
+
+Programs maintaining a frame pointer and frame records that use non-zero
+address tags may suffer impaired or inaccurate debug and profiling
+visibility.
+
+
+Preserving tags
+---------------
+
+Non-zero tags are not preserved when delivering signals. This means that
+signal handlers in applications making use of tags cannot rely on the
+tag information for user virtual addresses being maintained for fields
+inside siginfo_t. One exception to this rule is for signals raised in
+response to watchpoint debug exceptions, where the tag information will
+be preserved.
 
 The architecture prevents the use of a tagged PC, so the upper byte will
 be set to a sign-extension of bit 55 on exception return.
+
+
+Other considerations
+--------------------
+
+Special care should be taken when using tagged pointers, since it is
+likely that C compilers will not hazard two virtual addresses differing
+only in the upper byte.