From: "Wang, Jian J" <jian.j.wang@intel.com>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Cc: "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>,
"Dong, Eric" <eric.dong@intel.com>,
"Yao, Jiewen" <jiewen.yao@intel.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 03:29:48 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <D827630B58408649ACB04F44C510003624CAD72B@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9f53346f-c82c-c0ee-bca8-f53116227926@redhat.com>
This is really a surprise. Anyway, thanks for validating so many OSs. I guess we
have to turn to your suggestion before, which is adding capability to affected
memory block only, not all memory space.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Laszlo Ersek [mailto:lersek@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 8:24 PM
> To: Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang@intel.com>
> Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>; Yao, Jiewen
> <jiewen.yao@intel.com>; Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>; Matt
> Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in
> memory map
>
> Hi Jian,
>
> I'm CC'ing Ard and Matt, and commenting at the bottom.
>
> On 11/10/17 02:02, Jian J Wang wrote:
> >> v5:
> >> Coding style clean-up
> >
> >> v4:
> >> a. Remove DoUpdate and check attributes mismatch all the time to avoid
> >> a logic hole
> >> b. Add warning message if failed to update capability
> >> c. Add local variable to hold new attributes to make code cleaner
> >
> >> v3:
> >> a. Add comment to explain more on updating memory capabilities
> >> b. Fix logic hole in updating attributes
> >> c. Instead of checking illegal memory space address and size, use return
> >> status of gDS->SetMemorySpaceCapabilities() to skip memory block which
> >> cannot be updated with new capabilities.
> >
> >> v2
> >> a. Fix an issue which will cause setting capability failure if size is smaller
> >> than a page.
> >
> > More than one entry of RT_CODE memory might cause boot problem for
> some
> > old OSs. This patch will fix this issue to keep OS compatibility as much
> > as possible.
> >
> > More detailed information, please refer to
> > https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=753
> >
> > Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
> > Cc: Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
> > Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> > Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
> > Signed-off-by: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>
> > ---
> > UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c | 69
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c
> b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c
> > index d312eb66f8..61537838b7 100644
> > --- a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c
> > +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c
> > @@ -789,8 +789,7 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
> > UINT64 BaseAddress;
> > UINT64 PageStartAddress;
> > UINT64 Attributes;
> > - UINT64 Capabilities;
> > - BOOLEAN DoUpdate;
> > + UINT64 NewAttributes;
> > UINTN Index;
> >
> > //
> > @@ -802,9 +801,8 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
> >
> > GetCurrentPagingContext (&PagingContext);
> >
> > - DoUpdate = FALSE;
> > - Capabilities = 0;
> > Attributes = 0;
> > + NewAttributes = 0;
> > BaseAddress = 0;
> > PageLength = 0;
> >
> > @@ -813,6 +811,34 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
> > continue;
> > }
> >
> > + //
> > + // Sync the actual paging related capabilities back to GCD service first.
> > + // As a side effect (good one), this can also help to avoid unnecessary
> > + // memory map entries due to the different capabilities of the same type
> > + // memory, such as multiple RT_CODE and RT_DATA entries in memory
> map,
> > + // which could cause boot failure of some old Linux distro (before v4.3).
> > + //
> > + Status = gDS->SetMemorySpaceCapabilities (
> > + MemorySpaceMap[Index].BaseAddress,
> > + MemorySpaceMap[Index].Length,
> > + MemorySpaceMap[Index].Capabilities |
> > + EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK
> > + );
> > + if (EFI_ERROR (Status)) {
> > + //
> > + // If we cannot udpate the capabilities, we cannot update its
> > + // attributes either. So just simply skip current block of memory.
> > + //
> > + DEBUG ((
> > + DEBUG_WARN,
> > + "Failed to update capability: [%lu] %016lx - %016lx (%016lx -
> > %016lx)\r\n",
> > + (UINT64)Index, BaseAddress, BaseAddress + Length - 1,
> > + MemorySpaceMap[Index].Capabilities,
> > + MemorySpaceMap[Index].Capabilities | EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK
> > + ));
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (MemorySpaceMap[Index].BaseAddress >= (BaseAddress + PageLength)) {
> > //
> > // Current memory space starts at a new page. Resetting PageLength will
> > @@ -826,7 +852,9 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
> > PageLength -= (MemorySpaceMap[Index].BaseAddress - BaseAddress);
> > }
> >
> > - // Sync real page attributes to GCD
> > + //
> > + // Sync actual page attributes to GCD
> > + //
> > BaseAddress = MemorySpaceMap[Index].BaseAddress;
> > MemorySpaceLength = MemorySpaceMap[Index].Length;
> > while (MemorySpaceLength > 0) {
> > @@ -842,23 +870,26 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
> > PageStartAddress = (*PageEntry) &
> (UINT64)PageAttributeToMask(PageAttribute);
> > PageLength = PageAttributeToLength (PageAttribute) - (BaseAddress -
> PageStartAddress);
> > Attributes = GetAttributesFromPageEntry (PageEntry);
> > -
> > - if (Attributes != (MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes &
> EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK)) {
> > - DoUpdate = TRUE;
> > - Attributes |= (MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes &
> ~EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK);
> > - Capabilities = Attributes | MemorySpaceMap[Index].Capabilities;
> > - } else {
> > - DoUpdate = FALSE;
> > - }
> > }
> >
> > Length = MIN (PageLength, MemorySpaceLength);
> > - if (DoUpdate) {
> > - gDS->SetMemorySpaceCapabilities (BaseAddress, Length, Capabilities);
> > - gDS->SetMemorySpaceAttributes (BaseAddress, Length, Attributes);
> > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_INFO, "Update memory space attribute: [%02d] %016lx
> - %016lx (%08lx -> %08lx)\r\n",
> > - Index, BaseAddress, BaseAddress + Length - 1,
> > - MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes, Attributes));
> > + if (Attributes != (MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes &
> > + EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK)) {
> > + NewAttributes = (MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes &
> > + ~EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK) | Attributes;
> > + Status = gDS->SetMemorySpaceAttributes (
> > + BaseAddress,
> > + Length,
> > + NewAttributes
> > + );
> > + ASSERT_EFI_ERROR (Status);
> > + DEBUG ((
> > + DEBUG_INFO,
> > + "Updated memory space attribute: [%lu] %016lx - %016lx (%016lx -
> > %016lx)\r\n",
> > + (UINT64)Index, BaseAddress, BaseAddress + Length - 1,
> > + MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes,
> > + NewAttributes
> > + ));
> > }
> >
> > PageLength -= Length;
> >
>
> So, I was ready to give my R-b for this patch, but then I also wanted to
> test it. I applied the patch on current edk2 master (7e2a8dfe8a9a,
> "ArmPlatformPkg/PrePeiCore: seed temporary stack before entering PEI
> core", 2017-10-20), and built OVMF like this:
>
> $ build \
> -a IA32 \
> -a X64 \
> -p OvmfPkg/OvmfPkgIa32X64.dsc \
> -t GCC48 \
> -b NOOPT \
> -D SMM_REQUIRE \
> -D SECURE_BOOT_ENABLE \
> -D E1000_ENABLE \
> -D HTTP_BOOT_ENABLE
>
> For testing I used a recent-ish upstream QEMU development build
> (ae49fbbcd8e4, "Merge remote-tracking branch
> 'remotes/rth/tags/pull-tcg-20171025' into staging", 2017-10-25), with
> the Q35 machine type (which is required by SMM anyway).
>
> The results vary across guest OSes:
>
> (1) Up-to-date Fedora 26 guest crashes during boot, with the following
> call stack:
>
> BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at fffffffefe893018
> Call Trace:
> ? __change_page_attr_set_clr+0xaa6/0xd70
> ? kernel_map_pages_in_pgd+0xbc/0xd0
> ? efi_call+0x58/0x90
> ? virt_efi_set_variable.part.7+0x66/0x120
> ? virt_efi_set_variable+0x4f/0x60
> ? efi_delete_dummy_variable+0x62/0x90
> ? efi_enter_virtual_mode+0x4d4/0x4e8
> ? efi_enter_virtual_mode+0x4d4/0x4e8
> ? start_kernel+0x442/0x4e6
> ? early_idt_handler_array+0x120/0x120
> ? x86_64_start_reservations+0x24/0x26
> ? x86_64_start_kernel+0x13e/0x161
> ? secondary_startup_64+0x9f/0x9f
>
> (2) The following Windows OSes all boot successfully:
>
> - Windows 7
> - Windows Server 2008 R2
> - Windows 8.1
> - Windows Server 2012 R2
> - Windows 10
>
> (3) Windows Server 2016 crashes with a BSOD; reporting "ATTEMPTED WRITE
> TO READONLY MEMORY".
>
> (Without the patch, all OSes boot OK.)
>
>
> I'm attaching a ZIP file with the following contents (note that I'll
> attach the same file to TianoCore BZ#753 as well, because the mailing
> list archive(s) don't seem to preserve attachments):
>
> - "ovmf.pre.txt", "shell.memmap.pre.txt", "kernel.pre.txt": OVMF log,
> MEMMAP command output in the UEFI shell, and Fedora 26 kernel boot log
> (successful) *before* applying your patch. The kernel log is detailed
> (the cmdline had "ignore_loglevel" and "efi=debug").
>
> - "ovmf.post.txt", "shell.memmap.post.txt", "kernel.post.txt": same
> files as above, but saved *after* applying your patch. This is when the
> F26 kernel crashes.
>
> - "win2016.post.png": screenshot of the Windows Server 2016 boot failure
> (after the patch was applied).
>
> Thanks,
> Laszlo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-13 3:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-10 1:02 [PATCH v5] UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map Jian J Wang
2017-11-10 12:23 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-11-13 3:29 ` Wang, Jian J [this message]
2017-11-14 14:36 ` Wang, Jian J
2017-11-15 6:52 ` Zeng, Star
2017-11-15 7:36 ` Wang, Jian J
2017-11-15 9:27 ` Wang, Jian J
2017-11-15 15:48 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-11-15 15:59 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-11-16 2:46 ` Zeng, Star
2017-11-16 3:03 ` Yao, Jiewen
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=D827630B58408649ACB04F44C510003624CAD72B@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.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