From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>, edk2-devel@lists.01.org
Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>, Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:36:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d7020291-ef95-bdce-99d1-abc722ce0306@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171108105224.9560-1-jian.j.wang@intel.com>
On 11/08/17 11:52, Jian J Wang wrote:
>> 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 | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c
> index d312eb66f8..455c713dfc 100644
> --- a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c
> +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c
> @@ -789,7 +789,6 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
> UINT64 BaseAddress;
> UINT64 PageStartAddress;
> UINT64 Attributes;
> - UINT64 Capabilities;
> BOOLEAN DoUpdate;
> UINTN Index;
>
> @@ -803,7 +802,6 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
> GetCurrentPagingContext (&PagingContext);
>
> DoUpdate = FALSE;
> - Capabilities = 0;
> Attributes = 0;
> BaseAddress = 0;
> PageLength = 0;
> @@ -813,6 +811,27 @@ 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.
> + //
(1) Can you perhaps add a DEBUG_WARN here?
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> if (MemorySpaceMap[Index].BaseAddress >= (BaseAddress + PageLength)) {
> //
> // Current memory space starts at a new page. Resetting PageLength will
> @@ -826,7 +845,9 @@ 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) {
> @@ -845,8 +866,6 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
>
> 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;
> }
(2) To me it seems like we can remove the "DoUpdate" local variable
completely. Below, we can replace the DoUpdate check with the actual
(Attributes != (MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes &
EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK))
check.
The point is that we check the EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK bit-field of the
entry's attributes. If they do not match Attributes, we clear the full
bit-field, and then add Attributes back in. I.e., we set the bit-field
to the desired Attributes.
> @@ -854,11 +873,20 @@ RefreshGcdMemoryAttributesFromPaging (
>
> 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));
> + Status = gDS->SetMemorySpaceAttributes (
> + BaseAddress,
> + Length,
> + (MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes
> + & ~EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK) | Attributes
> + );
> + ASSERT_EFI_ERROR (Status);
> + DEBUG ((
> + DEBUG_INFO,
> + "Update memory space attribute: [%02d] %016lx - %016lx (%016lx -> %016lx)\r\n",
> + Index, BaseAddress, BaseAddress + Length - 1,
> + MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes,
> + (MemorySpaceMap[Index].Attributes & ~EFI_MEMORY_PAGETYPE_MASK) | Attributes
> + ));
> }
(3) I suggest introducing a new variable called
"NewMemorySpaceAttributes", and using that for both the debug message
and the SetMemorySpaceAttributes() call.
(4) Not closely related to this patch, but I'll mention it: the "%d"
format specifier is not right for printing UINTN values. The
32-bit/64-bit clean way to print UINTN is:
- cast the variable to UINT64 explicitly,
- print it with "%lu".
Thanks!
Laszlo
>
> PageLength -= Length;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-08 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-08 10:52 [PATCH v3] UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map Jian J Wang
2017-11-08 14:36 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2017-11-09 0:51 ` Wang, Jian J
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-11-09 1:39 Jian J Wang
2017-11-09 14:12 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-11-10 0:22 ` Wang, Jian J
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=d7020291-ef95-bdce-99d1-abc722ce0306@redhat.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