public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: "Gao, Liming" <liming.gao@intel.com>,
	edk2-devel-01 <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	"Justen, Jordan L" <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] OvmfPkg: disable build-time relocation for DXEFV modules
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2017 22:36:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1990275e-e537-54c9-cbc3-2712c4abcbcc@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14D74FBA1@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>

Liming,

On 06/29/17 05:32, Gao, Liming wrote:
> Laszlo:
>   LMFA feature doesn't do PE image rebase at build time. Only XIP
>   module needs to be rebased at build time.

Thank you for the clarification.

In this case, BaseTools/GenFv has a bug.

Namely, if LMFA does not need build-time relocation for DXE-phase
modules, then *what exactly* needs build-time relocation for DXE-phase
modules?

This is the code in "BaseTools/Source/C/GenFv/GenFvInternalLib.c":

  3537        case EFI_FV_FILETYPE_DRIVER:
  3538        case EFI_FV_FILETYPE_DXE_CORE:
  3539          //
  3540          // Check if section-alignment and file-alignment match or not
  3541          //
  3542          if ((ImgHdr->Pe32.OptionalHeader.SectionAlignment != ImgHdr->Pe32.OptionalHeader.FileAlignment)) {
  3543            //
  3544            // Xip module has the same section alignment and file alignment.
  3545            //
  3546            Error (NULL, 0, 3000, "Invalid", "Section-Alignment and File-Alignment do not match : %s.", FileName);
  3547            return EFI_ABORTED;
  3548          }
  3549          NewPe32BaseAddress = XipBase + (UINTN) CurrentPe32Section.Pe32Section + CurSecHdrSize - (UINTN)FfsFile;
  3550          break;

According to the Platform Init 1.6 spec,

- 2.1.4.1 Firmware File Types:

  [...] the type EFI_FV_FILETYPE_DRIVER indicates that the file is a DXE
  driver and is interesting to the DXE Dispatcher.

- 2.1.4.1.4 EFI_FV_FILETYPE_DRIVER:

  The file type EFI_FV_FILETYPE_DRIVER denotes a file that contains a
  PE32 image that can be dispatched by the DXE Dispatcher.

So, *when exactly* is it the case that a module dispatched by the DXE
core *needs* build-time relocation?

I claim that the answer is "never", and therefore the above code is a
bug in BaseTools/GenFv.

I thought that this build-time relocation was needed by the LMFA
feature, but you confirmed above that LMFA does not need it. So, it
looks like *nothing at all* needs build-time relocation for
EFI_FV_FILETYPE_DRIVER, because the modules dispatched by the DXE core
are *never* XIP modules.

Do you agree?

>   For this case, OvmfPkg DXEFV doesn't require to run as XIP. So, it
>   doesn't require rebase. I agree this change.

This change (for the OVMF FDF files) is only valid if the above
BaseTools/GenFv code is also valid. In other words, *if* there is at
least one valid reason for rebasing DXE modules at build-time.

If there is *no* such reason, then the OVMF FDF files do not need this
change, and GenFv must be fixed instead.

So: if LMFA is *not* the one reason that justifies the rebasing for
EFI_FV_FILETYPE_DRIVER, then *what* is the reason? In my commit message
for the OVMF FDF change, I have to refer to that exact reason.

Thanks
Laszlo


  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-01 20:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-28 22:06 [PATCH 0/2] OvmfPkg: refresh -D E1000_ENABLE (Intel proprietary driver for e1000) Laszlo Ersek
2017-06-28 22:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] OvmfPkg: disable build-time relocation for DXEFV modules Laszlo Ersek
2017-06-29  3:32   ` Gao, Liming
2017-07-01 20:36     ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2017-07-03 15:08       ` Gao, Liming
2017-07-03 17:53         ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-07-05 17:48     ` Jordan Justen
2017-07-05 17:55       ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-06-28 22:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] OvmfPkg: update -D E1000_ENABLE from Intel PROEFI v.07 to BootUtil v.22 Laszlo Ersek
2017-06-30  1:20   ` Wu, Jiaxin
2017-07-01 20:22     ` Laszlo Ersek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1990275e-e537-54c9-cbc3-2712c4abcbcc@redhat.com \
    --to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox