From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.132.183.28; helo=mx1.redhat.com; envelope-from=lersek@redhat.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AAB720355222 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 06:13:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB92D8046E; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 14:17:29 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com AB92D8046E Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=lersek@redhat.com Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-120-142.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.120.142]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFFD7649A2; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 14:17:28 +0000 (UTC) To: "Wang, Jian J" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" Cc: "Yao, Jiewen" , "Dong, Eric" References: <20171103005729.7856-1-jian.j.wang@intel.com> <82c64ab0-25b3-5f7d-cf99-c0d2f87e99da@redhat.com> From: Laszlo Ersek Message-ID: Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:17:27 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Wed, 08 Nov 2017 14:17:29 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2017 14:13:29 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/08/17 01:10, Wang, Jian J wrote: > Hi Laszlo, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Laszlo Ersek [mailto:lersek@redhat.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2017 1:14 AM >> To: Wang, Jian J ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org >> Cc: Yao, Jiewen ; Dong, Eric >> Subject: Re: [edk2] [PATCH v2] UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of >> RT_CODE in memory map >> >> sorry about the late response >> >> On 11/03/17 01:57, Jian J Wang wrote: >>>> 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 >>> Cc: Jiewen Yao >>> Cc: Laszlo Ersek >>> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1 >>> Signed-off-by: Jian J Wang >>> --- >>> UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c | 18 ++++++++++++++---- >>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c >> b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c >>> index d312eb66f8..4a7827ebc9 100644 >>> --- a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c >>> +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c >>> @@ -809,7 +809,9 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging ( >>> PageLength = 0; >>> >>> for (Index = 0; Index < NumberOfDescriptors; Index++) { >>> - if (MemorySpaceMap[Index].GcdMemoryType == >> EfiGcdMemoryTypeNonExistent) { >>> + if (MemorySpaceMap[Index].GcdMemoryType == >> EfiGcdMemoryTypeNonExistent >>> + || (MemorySpaceMap[Index].BaseAddress & EFI_PAGE_MASK) != 0 >>> + || (MemorySpaceMap[Index].Length & EFI_PAGE_MASK) != 0) { >>> continue; >>> } >> >> When exactly do the new conditions match? >> >> I thought the base addresses and the lengths in the GCD memory space map >> are all page aligned. Is that not the case? >> >> If these conditions are just a sanity check (i.e. we never expect them >> to fire), then should we perpahs turn them into ASSERT()s? >> > > I found that there's a mmio entry in memory map on OVMF which has size > less than a page. I didn't encounter this before. Maybe some recent changes > in other part of EDKII caused this situation. So ASSERT is not enough. Can you describe the base address and size of this MMIO entry? I don't see how it is possible to add such an entry in the first place -- if you try to add it in PEI, via a HOB, then IIRC HobLib will ASSERT(). If you try to add it with gDS->AddMemorySpace() in DXE, then the call should fail. I believe it might be useful to investigate this entry more closely. Knowing the base address could help us. Thanks! Laszlo