From: "Fan Jeff" <vanjeff_919@hotmail.com>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>,
"devel@edk2.groups.io" <devel@edk2.groups.io>,
"eric.dong@intel.com" <eric.dong@intel.com>,
"Ni, Ray" <ray.ni@intel.com>
Cc: "Lou, Yun" <yun.lou@intel.com>
Subject: 回复: 回复: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2] UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Add check for CR3/GDT/IDT.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 07:32:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <MWHPR19MB0030EAA3D5A79EA327DDE793D72D0@MWHPR19MB0030.namprd19.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f46a0e18-82e0-2fdd-5098-3ea4f459459a@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6121 bytes --]
Laszlo,
Why sync the BSP’s CR3/GDT/IDT values for AP when AP wakes up instead of using old cached BSP’s CR3/GDT/IDT values when CPU driver initiallly dispatched is that we CANNOT assume original values are still valid during POST phase.
On this senario, BSP’s CR3/GDT/IDT are just like input parameters for one function. Validating them are necessary.
For example, DebugAgentDxe driver may be loaded in UEFI shell to setup source level debugging enviroment of EDKII debugger tools. It may setup new IDT space.
Jeff
发件人: Laszlo Ersek<mailto:lersek@redhat.com>
发送时间: 2020年9月4日 14:58
收件人: Fan Jeff<mailto:vanjeff_919@hotmail.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; eric.dong@intel.com<mailto:eric.dong@intel.com>; Ni, Ray<mailto:ray.ni@intel.com>
抄送: Lou, Yun<mailto:yun.lou@intel.com>
主题: Re: 回复: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2] UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Add check for CR3/GDT/IDT.
On 09/04/20 04:18, Fan Jeff wrote:
> Laszlo & Eric,
>
> Introducing one new PCD to handle such rare test case is too heavy. I think We could do validating CR3/GDT/IDT space < 4GB address always in MpInitLib.
I disagree.
What the UEFI application does (interfere with GDT / IDT / CR3
placement) is invalid. It changes system properties under the feet of
platform DXE drivers. UEFI applications are supposed to be written
against public protocols and services in the UEFI spec (and maybe in the
PI spec).
If this application is a test application that purposely massages
low-level system properties, that's fine; but then, if we change core
edk2 components to be somewhat compatible with this application, then we
should make sure that platforms that do not care about this specific use
case do not suffer a performance hit or a code complexity hit.
What I could accept, under your proposal, is the following: add three
ASSERT()s to FillExchangeInfoData(), where we fetch the IDTR / GDTR /
CR3 anyway. This would be fine because it only expresses existing
assumptions / requirements.
However, my understanding is that this would not solve Eric's problem.
The system would hang -- in DEBUG / NOOPT builds -- or crash -- in a
RELEASE build -- just the same as before.
Now, *if* FillExchangeInfoData() is currently *wrong* to have these
32-bit assumptions, because edk2 modules themselves can break those
assumptions (without the custom UEFI application), then we have a more
serious problem. But for that problem, just "checking and rejecting" is
not a sufficient solution, regardless of how and where we check and reject.
Thanks
Laszlo
>
> Jeff
>
> 发件人: Dong, Eric<mailto:eric.dong@intel.com>
> 发送时间: 2020年9月4日 10:01
> 收件人: Ni, Ray<mailto:ray.ni@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; lersek@redhat.com<mailto:lersek@redhat.com>
> 抄送: Lou, Yun<mailto:yun.lou@intel.com>
> 主题: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2] UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Add check for CR3/GDT/IDT.
>
> I guess Laszlo think this check is not always needed, just used for this special shell application case. He wants to use default FALSE to always ignore this check and make code logic clear.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric
>
> From: Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 9:34 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; lersek@redhat.com; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>
> Cc: Lou, Yun <yun.lou@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2] UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Add check for CR3/GDT/IDT.
>
> Why do we need a new PCD to control such check? Under what circumstance the PCD is false?
> We may need to move such check out of MpLib.c. Because when bps runs at 32bit mode, AP doesn’t need to switch to long mode, such check is not needed and also always passes.
>
> We should not assume PEI runs at 32 bit mode.
>
>
> 发件人: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io> <devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>> 代表 Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com<mailto:lersek@redhat.com>>
> 发送时间: Friday, September 4, 2020 3:55:47 AM
> 收件人: Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com<mailto:eric.dong@intel.com>>; devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io> <devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>>
> 抄送: Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com<mailto:ray.ni@intel.com>>
> 主题: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2] UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Add check for CR3/GDT/IDT.
>
> On 09/03/20 21:00, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>
>> (10) More importantly, ValidCR3GdtIdtCheck() should not be called in the
>> Worker functions for StartupAllAPs, StartupThisAP, SwitchBSP, and
>> EnableDisableAP, in "UefiCpuPkg/Library/MpInitLib/MpLib.c".
>>
>> Instead, the calls should be made in the DXE instance of the library
>> ("UefiCpuPkg/Library/MpInitLib/DxeMpLib.c"), at the very top of the
>> functions:
>>
>> - MpInitLibStartupAllAPs
>> - MpInitLibStartupThisAP
>> - MpInitLibSwitchBSP
>> - MpInitLibEnableDisableAP
>>
>> Here's why:
>>
>> (a) The symptom does not affect the PEI phase -- by the time the UEFI
>> application is executed, the PEI phase has ended; there's no need to
>> modify the PEI instance of the library.
>>
>> (b) The currently proposed failure exits are too late. For example, in
>> the SwitchBSPWorker() function, by the time we exit, we have called
>> DisableApicTimerInterrupt(), SaveAndDisableInterrupts(), and
>> DisableLvtInterrupts() -- and the error path does not restore the
>> original environment.
>>
>> (c) According to the PI spec (v1.7), the StartupAllAPs(),
>> StartupThisAP(), SwitchBSP(), EnableDisableAP() member functions of
>> EFI_MP_SERVICES_PROTOCOL may only be called on the (current) BSP.
>> Because of this, it is OK to call ValidCR3GdtIdtCheck() as the very
>> first action in the above-listed DxeMpLib functions.
>>
>> (Assuming the protocol members are called from an AP, and consequently
>> we check CR3 / GDTR / IDTR on the AP (and not on the BSP), that's the
>> *caller's* fault, per spec!)
>
> This means we can move the ValidCr3GdtIdtCheck() function to
> "DxeMpLib.c", and it is not necessary to modify "MpLib.h".
>
> Thanks
> Laszlo
>
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 11264 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-04 7:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-03 15:11 [PATCH v2] UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Add check for CR3/GDT/IDT Dong, Eric
2020-09-03 19:00 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-03 19:55 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-04 1:34 ` [edk2-devel] " Ni, Ray
2020-09-04 2:00 ` Dong, Eric
2020-09-04 2:18 ` 回复: " vanjeff_919
2020-09-04 2:27 ` Dong, Eric
2020-09-04 3:09 ` Yao, Jiewen
2020-09-04 6:50 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-04 6:58 ` 回复: " Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-04 7:32 ` Fan Jeff [this message]
2020-09-04 8:06 ` Yao, Jiewen
2020-09-04 8:36 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-05 12:30 ` Yao, Jiewen
2020-09-05 13:50 ` Dong, Eric
2020-09-07 9:22 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-04 8:43 ` 回复: " Fan Jeff
2020-09-04 8:23 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-04 6:47 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-04 2:00 ` Dong, Eric
[not found] <163188258B195C29.8972@groups.io>
2020-09-04 11:17 ` 回复: 回复: " Fan Jeff
2020-09-04 11:48 ` Yao, Jiewen
2020-09-04 12:08 ` 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=MWHPR19MB0030EAA3D5A79EA327DDE793D72D0@MWHPR19MB0030.namprd19.prod.outlook.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