All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@epam.com>
To: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: "sstabellini@kernel.org" <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	"iwj@xenproject.org" <iwj@xenproject.org>,
	Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@arm.com>,
	Rahul Singh <rahul.singh@arm.com>,
	Oleksandr Andrushchenko <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@epam.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 12:09:23 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d63c6e0b-8aa3-9ba3-893c-5e464638a8db@epam.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cb7e9ef7-476e-93c3-d3c9-9a9ebc61003d@xen.org>

Hi, Julien!

On 27.10.21 20:35, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Oleksandr,
>
> On 27/10/2021 09:25, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com>
>>
>> While in vPCI MMIO trap handlers for the guest PCI host bridge it is not
>> enough for SBDF translation to simply call VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa) as
>> the base address may not be aligned in the way that the translation
>> always work. If not adjusted with respect to the base address it may not be
>> able to properly convert SBDF and crashes:
>>
>> (XEN) vpci_mmio_read 0000:65:1a.0 reg 8bc gpa e65d08bc
>
> I can't find a printk() that may output this message. Where does this comes from?
That was a debug print. I shouldn't have used that in the patch description, but
probably after "---" to better explain what's happening
>
> Anyway, IIUC the guest physical address is 0xe65d08bc which, if I am not mistaken, doesn't belong to the range advertised for GUEST_VPCI_ECAM.
This is from dom0 I am working on now.
>
> IMHO, the stack trace should come from usptream Xen or need some information to explain how this was reproduced.
>
>> (XEN) Data Abort Trap. Syndrome=0x6
>> (XEN) Walking Hypervisor VA 0x467a28bc on CPU0 via TTBR 0x00000000481d5000
> I can understnad that if we don't substract GUEST_VPCI_ECAM, we would (in theory) not get the correct BDF. But... I don't understand how this would result to a data abort in the hypervisor.
>
> In fact, I think the vPCI code should be resilient enough to not crash if we pass the wrong BDF.
Well, there is no (?) easy way to validate SBDF. And this could be a problem if we have a misbehaving
guest which may force Xen to access the memory beyond that of PCI host bridge
>
> When there is a data abort in Xen, you should get a stack trace from where this comes from. Can you paste it here?
(XEN) Data Abort Trap. Syndrome=0x6
(XEN) Walking Hypervisor VA 0x467a28bc on CPU0 via TTBR 0x00000000481d5000
(XEN) 0TH[0x0] = 0x00000000481d4f7f
(XEN) 1ST[0x1] = 0x00000000481d2f7f
(XEN) 2ND[0x33] = 0x0000000000000000
(XEN) CPU0: Unexpected Trap: Data Abort
(XEN) ----[ Xen-4.16-unstable  arm64  debug=y  Not tainted ]----
(XEN) CPU:    0
(XEN) PC:     000000000026d3d4 pci_generic_config_read+0x88/0x9c
(XEN) LR:     000000000026d36c
(XEN) SP:     000080007ff97c00
(XEN) CPSR:   0000000060400249 MODE:64-bit EL2h (Hypervisor, handler)
(XEN)      X0: 00000000467a28bc  X1: 00000000065d08bc  X2: 00000000000008bc
(XEN)      X3: 000000000000000c  X4: 000080007ffc6fd0  X5: 0000000000000000
(XEN)      X6: 0000000000000014  X7: ffff800011a58000  X8: ffff0000225a0380
(XEN)      X9: 0000000000000000 X10: 0101010101010101 X11: 0000000000000028
(XEN)     X12: 0101010101010101 X13: 0000000000000020 X14: ffffffffffffffff
(XEN)     X15: 0000000000000001 X16: ffff800010da6708 X17: 0000000000000020
(XEN)     X18: 0000000000000002 X19: 0000000000000004 X20: 000080007ff97c5c
(XEN)     X21: 00000000000008bc X22: 00000000000008bc X23: 0000000000000004
(XEN)     X24: 0000000000000000 X25: 00000000000008bc X26: 00000000000065d0
(XEN)     X27: 000080007ffb9010 X28: 0000000000000000  FP: 000080007ff97c00
(XEN)
(XEN)   VTCR_EL2: 00000000800a3558
(XEN)  VTTBR_EL2: 00010000bffba000
(XEN)
(XEN)  SCTLR_EL2: 0000000030cd183d
(XEN)    HCR_EL2: 00000000807c663f
(XEN)  TTBR0_EL2: 00000000481d5000
(XEN)
(XEN)    ESR_EL2: 0000000096000006
(XEN)  HPFAR_EL2: 0000000000e65d00
(XEN)    FAR_EL2: 00000000467a28bc
(XEN)
[snip]
(XEN) Xen call trace:
(XEN)    [<000000000026d3d4>] pci_generic_config_read+0x88/0x9c (PC)
(XEN)    [<000000000026d36c>] pci_generic_config_read+0x20/0x9c (LR)
(XEN)    [<000000000026d2c8>] pci-access.c#pci_config_read+0x60/0x84
(XEN)    [<000000000026d4a8>] pci_conf_read32+0x10/0x18
(XEN)    [<000000000024dcf8>] vpci.c#vpci_read_hw+0x48/0xb8
(XEN)    [<000000000024e3e4>] vpci_read+0xac/0x24c
(XEN)    [<000000000024e934>] vpci_ecam_read+0x78/0xa8
(XEN)    [<000000000026e368>] vpci.c#vpci_mmio_read+0x44/0x7c
(XEN)    [<0000000000275054>] try_handle_mmio+0x1ec/0x264
(XEN)    [<000000000027ea50>] traps.c#do_trap_stage2_abort_guest+0x18c/0x2d8
(XEN)    [<000000000027f088>] do_trap_guest_sync+0xf0/0x618
(XEN)    [<0000000000269c58>] entry.o#guest_sync_slowpath+0xa4/0xd4
(XEN)
(XEN)
(XEN) ****************************************
(XEN) Panic on CPU 0:
(XEN) CPU0: Unexpected Trap: Data Abort
(XEN) ****************************************

>
>>
>> Fix this by adjusting the gpa with respect to the host bridge base address
>> in a way as it is done for x86.
>>
>> Fixes: d59168dc05a5 ("xen/arm: Enable the existing x86 virtual PCI support for ARM")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com>
>> ---
>>   xen/arch/arm/vpci.c | 4 ++--
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vpci.c b/xen/arch/arm/vpci.c
>> index 8f40a0dec6d2..23f45386f4b3 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/vpci.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vpci.c
>> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ static int vpci_mmio_read(struct vcpu *v, mmio_info_t *info,
>>       unsigned long data;
>>         /* We ignore segment part and always handle segment 0 */
>> -    sbdf.sbdf = VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa);
>> +    sbdf.sbdf = VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa - GUEST_VPCI_ECAM_BASE);
>
> Looking at the rest of the rest, it seems that
>  1) the issue is latent as the bits 0-27 are clear
>  2) this will need to be modified to take into account dom0.
>
> So I would prefer if the base address is passed differently (maybe in priv?) from the start. This will avoid extra modification that you already plan to have in a follow-up series.
I was thinking about the same, but the future code will use priv for other purpose:

static int vpci_mmio_read(struct vcpu *v, mmio_info_t *info,
                           register_t *r, void *p)
{
     struct pci_host_bridge *bridge = p;
     pci_sbdf_t sbdf;
     /* data is needed to prevent a pointer cast on 32bit */
     unsigned long data;

     if ( bridge )
     {
         sbdf.sbdf = VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa - bridge->cfg->phys_addr);
         sbdf.seg = bridge->segment;
     }
     else
         sbdf.sbdf = VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa - GUEST_VPCI_ECAM_BASE);

>
>>         if ( vpci_ecam_read(sbdf, ECAM_REG_OFFSET(info->gpa),
>>                           1U << info->dabt.size, &data) )
>> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static int vpci_mmio_write(struct vcpu *v, mmio_info_t *info,
>>       pci_sbdf_t sbdf;
>>         /* We ignore segment part and always handle segment 0 */
>> -    sbdf.sbdf = VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa);
>> +    sbdf.sbdf = VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa - GUEST_VPCI_ECAM_BASE);
>>         return vpci_ecam_write(sbdf, ECAM_REG_OFFSET(info->gpa),
>>                              1U << info->dabt.size, r);
>>
>
> Cheers,
>
Thank you,
Oleksandr

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-28 12:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-27  8:25 [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-10-27  8:59 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-10-27  9:04   ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-10-27  9:23     ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-10-27  9:46       ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-10-27 17:07     ` Ian Jackson
2021-11-01 10:25       ` [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers [and 2 more messages] Ian Jackson
2021-11-01 21:06         ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-11-02  7:16           ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-11-02  9:32             ` Julien Grall
2021-11-02 11:21               ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-11-02 15:55           ` Ian Jackson
2021-10-27 17:35 ` [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers Julien Grall
2021-10-28 12:09   ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko [this message]
2021-10-28 13:22     ` Julien Grall
2021-10-28 14:16       ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-10-28 14:28         ` Julien Grall
2021-10-28 15:27           ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-10-28 15:35             ` Julien Grall
2021-10-28 15:54               ` Ian Jackson
2021-10-29  9:15                 ` Julien Grall
2021-10-28 18:00               ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-10-28 13:36     ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-10-28 14:23       ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-10-28 16:03         ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-10-28 17:55           ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-10-29  7:33             ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-11-01  6:14               ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-11-02  7:37                 ` Wei Chen
2021-11-02  7:46                   ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-11-02  8:12                     ` Wei Chen
2021-11-02  8:48                 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-11-02  9:07                   ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2021-11-02  9:32                     ` Roger Pau Monné

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-all 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=d63c6e0b-8aa3-9ba3-893c-5e464638a8db@epam.com \
    --to=oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com \
    --cc=bertrand.marquis@arm.com \
    --cc=iwj@xenproject.org \
    --cc=julien@xen.org \
    --cc=rahul.singh@arm.com \
    --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.