From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom;
 client-ip=217.140.101.70; helo=foss.arm.com;
 envelope-from=mark.rutland@arm.com; receiver=edk2-devel@ml01.01.org 
Received: from foss.arm.com (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [217.140.101.70])
 by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C3C211A6D56
 for <edk2-devel@ml01.01.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 02:46:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249])
 by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB2D3EBD;
 Mon, 28 Jan 2019 02:46:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from blommer (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [217.140.101.70])
 by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 124003F589;
 Mon, 28 Jan 2019 02:46:37 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 10:46:34 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
 Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
 "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" <edk2-devel@ml01.01.org>,
 Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>,
 Tanxiaojun <tanxiaojun@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <20190128104634.xnaivxxbvad7jffo@blommer>
References: <1449471969-16949-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
 <f2c9c8cc-ab0c-f094-f921-aa207a730d1b@redhat.com>
 <CAKv+Gu_sXc9JkY0NAUtRj=kfi-=7WBXz6=Rhm13Apr9GJsRG8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <2dd4294c-76f0-f433-cbd2-bf0b37114aee@redhat.com>
 <CAKv+Gu_Qvcr7mrJ215fQkO+V8wVE58Bi0-Qk=_wvhxGU5_oR-Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <12fa0861-e25d-eba7-48ea-2bd7d47d58fb@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <12fa0861-e25d-eba7-48ea-2bd7d47d58fb@redhat.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ArmPkg: update InvalidateInstructionCacheRange to flush only to PoU
X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: EDK II Development  <edk2-devel.lists.01.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/options/edk2-devel>,
 <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.01.org/pipermail/edk2-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
List-Help: <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel>,
 <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 10:46:40 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:54:56AM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 01/23/19 10:26, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 10:14, Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> On 01/22/19 16:37, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> 
> >>> Is SetUefiImageMemoryAttributes() being
> >>> called to remap the memory R-X ?
> >>
> >> No, it is not; the grub binary in question doesn't have the required
> >> section alignment (... I hope at least that that's what your question
> >> refers to):
> >>
> >>> ProtectUefiImageCommon - 0x3E6C54C0
> >>>   - 0x000000013BEEF000 - 0x0000000000030600
> >>> !!!!!!!!  ProtectUefiImageCommon - Section Alignment(0x200) is
> >> incorrect  !!!!!!!!
> > 
> > This is puzzling, given that the exact same binary works on Mustang.
> 
> And even on the original (unspecified) hardware, the same binary works
> frequently. My understanding is that there are five VMs executing reboot
> loops in parallel, on the same host, and 4 out of 5 may hit the issue in
> a reasonable time period (300 reboots or so).

Interesting.

Do you happen to know how many VMID bits the host has? If it has an 8-bit VMID,
this could be indicative of some problem upon overflow.

Can you point us at the host kernel?

Thanks,
Mark.