From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229; helo=mail-oi0-x229.google.com; envelope-from=rafaelrodrigues.machado@gmail.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B40CA210C642A for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x229.google.com with SMTP id 8-v6so5607349oip.0 for ; Thu, 02 Aug 2018 12:18:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=OZrPlthyqWwfVhAhi6qa4tz2IQmFymzu88I1/6ayaO8=; b=TY7+qvkiyPmnv+ed89VGIUbObc9DYviW0Ik7exgcJeLmEgM+W1FmtdidHKs7BL29yR GX5Uhr6pJK6hnwouTbUcu11eTlAKL8V2VUDaYYt6uaXiW1X0lgJInv4yExUZy4hMbB+q JQjhhj8pdUleSW3Pe6T+m0fEKMxW+P+oER9LNSHUug18WwyIUwvAa7+E0od7Bf1HMBmq fsJk0HTVZhojhOeSxvF8tJ0cjTFLYh+rg/B/2VuhLnd5vcaqlFpPr1Bbr3Zy2LhDSQDy /ImOBQSOd51qtInLQ/7QDPCLs0JLvrDq3iB/7ex+z/qfb8HqVMAx6/tCxCP50Wf4d69r 2Cxw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OZrPlthyqWwfVhAhi6qa4tz2IQmFymzu88I1/6ayaO8=; b=OPtgodqkDttSDRFb8kU50vdFMLSp6NgNNXskXwkXPLoEod8kmq69c61a5rW9GCt5mA chW5YOXlxjgRoLNAqHbDgwQPcR/RNoMpd3f7cCjUVwFHK+dqvzHnUfXV3luwtMA+xS6y EyZvGiKmM+1qqeJnDJIvoBfZfkSUxpRrqrZS82QggFr+PGcHbbnBgoICqhjU1V0A/O3K DYImJclpIRzS0gsZiCOzjhFonBWKitnGnbWpFbEMVlL7Tol0X86iWJ7OzFyHDV2P6jzq ojbEjDxZD8d78QHGrm7PWAYZmZNKHy0E5oP1uKxWJJIy60wK9hBlj2z0AvsEfcWZJMnZ bEbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlF67lHO7Tm7vMDxnsSUnQYz1tMrCGRLJWdHI0KlJp5oNF93ntUF Uy6VZpecwVoBGKHTdT6jPLbsiqUonjebqNMfAJU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcSW1Vzxrbjc4/MqCgL2ewwOkQpUolROKWLaC2OZzu93rhy+NjGn7t2QJPjxXZ5qje5mJQCIybXA8L9rvYDeBw= X-Received: by 2002:aca:5003:: with SMTP id e3-v6mr63486oib.89.1533237505886; Thu, 02 Aug 2018 12:18:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503AC75235@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5BD4FFA1@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <17C6FC15-6D2E-41A6-8996-15E665C4D28F@apple.com> <40832a91-0eca-3b9f-f533-f98666295a25@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: Rafael Machado Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 16:18:14 -0300 Message-ID: To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: Andrew Fish , "Ni, Ruiyu" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , "Yao, Jiewen" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.27 Subject: Re: Question about memory map entries X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 19:18:27 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just found something interesting. Based on the logs from the serial port. This system works fine: "PeiInstallPeiMemory MemoryBegin 0x93D50000, MemoryLength 0xA2B0000 Temp Stack : BaseAddress=3D0x400000 Length=3D0x80000 Temp Heap : BaseAddress=3D0x480000 Length=3D0x80000 Total temporary memory: 1048576 bytes. temporary memory stack ever used: 524288 bytes. temporary memory heap used: 63304 bytes. Old Stack size 524288, New stack size 524288 Stack Hob: BaseAddress=3D0x93D50000 Length=3D0x80000 Heap Offset =3D 0x93950000 Stack Offset =3D 0x93950000 Loading PEIM at 0x0009DFF4000 EntryPoint=3D0x0009DFF4260 PeiCore.efi" ... "CoreInitializeMemoryServices: BaseAddress - 0x93DE1000 Length - 0x8135000 MinimalMemorySizeNeeded - 0x5AC0000" This one is bricked: "PeiInstallPeiMemory MemoryBegin 0x9C9000, MemoryLength 0x9D637000 Temp Stack : BaseAddress=3D0x400000 Length=3D0x80000 Temp Heap : BaseAddress=3D0x480000 Length=3D0x80000 Total temporary memory: 1048576 bytes. temporary memory stack ever used: 524288 bytes. temporary memory heap used: 63304 bytes. Old Stack size 524288, New stack size 524288 Stack Hob: BaseAddress=3D0x9C9000 Length=3D0x80000 Heap Offset =3D 0x5C9000 Stack Offset =3D 0x5C9000 Loading PEIM at 0x0009DFF4000 EntryPoint=3D0x0009DFF4260 PeiCore.efi" ... "CoreInitializeMemoryServices: BaseAddress - 0x0 Length - 0x0 MinimalMemorySizeNeeded - 0x98E47000 " ... "ASSERT_EFI_ERROR (Status =3D Out of Resources) ASSERT [DxeCore] ...\MdeModulePkg\Core\Dxe\DxeMain\DxeMain.c(299): !EFI_ERROR (Status) AllocatePoolPages: failed to allocate 1 pages AllocatePool: failed to allocate 120 bytes" It's really strange that the "Stack Hob base address" is so different, and the "MemoryBegin" also. This is making the memory to be detected incorrectly as far as I could understand. So CoreInitializeMemoryServices does not have enougth memory to work on. Any idea about what could cause this difference? Unfortunately I don't have the system in hands. And also cannot share the entire log due to legal. But these are the differences between the bricked system and the normal one. Any idea? Thanks and Regards Rafael R. Machado Em qui, 2 de ago de 2018 =C3=A0s 16:02, Rafael Machado < rafaelrodrigues.machado@gmail.com> escreveu: > Hi Laszlo > > Got your point. Thanks for the comment. > > I'll keep working on it. > In case someone has some other information or idea feel free to share. > > Thanks > Rafael > > Em qui, 2 de ago de 2018 =C3=A0s 14:48, Laszlo Ersek > escreveu: > >> On 08/02/18 18:42, Rafael Machado wrote: >> > Thanks Andrew and Laszlo for the clarification and guidance. >> > >> > About Laszlo questions >> > >> >> Is the reboot automatic (from the platform firmware), or application = / >> >> user initiated? >> > Yes. We just do some clean up, finish the events and "return >> EFI_SUCCESS;" >> >> That's really strange. I don't think that's valid or expected behavior. >> If a boot option exits with success, then, as I understand it, the boot >> manager is expected to return to the setup UI at once. (I don't have a >> reference ready for this, but I remember someone mentioning it.) Boot >> option processing continues only if the current boot option exits with >> failure. >> >> I think the reboot you see is actually a crash. (Not saying that the >> issue is in your application, just that the reboot should not be >> triggered by either the application or the platform firmware.) >> >> Thanks, >> Laszlo >> >