From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D031C3F2CD for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 23:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6BA8246B6 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 23:03:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="kTxAwJzS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726448AbgCAXDt (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Mar 2020 18:03:49 -0500 Received: from mail-qv1-f68.google.com ([209.85.219.68]:37958 "EHLO mail-qv1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726418AbgCAXDt (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Mar 2020 18:03:49 -0500 Received: by mail-qv1-f68.google.com with SMTP id g16so4040415qvz.5 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2020 15:03:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=2ZqOPNFVfLyDHzJ0hvD2e4l57CrAH4FTvWsQKCR5ohA=; b=kTxAwJzSklvSvq/nUy/YQfbd/mMZHwipTDFPRco5V/t8ey5IBqsgFwrF0fH7WNm6sN V8WdYQvrmu+H1o06Fetxc0wpdQVtW7W+jsO7bIoj97+trFcpRCslI99E+aJI+KZIH11B 5ZOUKLh02LL3J1YzhuSW8Y7+8GC4BJQcHDLtXOATvEA8pxwIALJZvLOSVXOMMtQzShs8 daDIv29ZDwNyzPFA8FE9oYUnSwGnjy2LndnFePSALEYrTqWXhzNfepDtir7IU1brDXgB HlaHXbXLulSHL4ttHNxsatBqJSgt5RpvZTG/Rjf00nrWJcKcWTNt5oNXIeKP0ZwARyEU JIrw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=2ZqOPNFVfLyDHzJ0hvD2e4l57CrAH4FTvWsQKCR5ohA=; b=efX0eifBrMK7p2GTz0/QN8q1flE9bCQk8VnvKSBhaqSOn2IFPuvPwJNsZ41WiwryQL bM2HQaVJQiCob8MMO+Ct4GkxlqjrZ2JFvG1+HhRaFhU4Wol92fKxYWF+1oiENuehyKZg 9FMx05DxMolHFfynDz8Bqo6GzZGN9w43N6e8l2MDQhFecON7QiZSxCsFDXOWoB0BZYQW oxHa8chRvKlPmCBB/aYIIFFK5e7RvPpwIGmJrtMON/Jlpyz3br2Gm2M6b2qVzgGg9Zmr OH8nQUSLUupdxTPMMVDNcZYEtMf7ir4aH350YsU2hcd0NUY+lrCXnT3ByjJYskbYhTAa dmhw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVl/R1dtQmZby/NZ8GoajD5bKIvSPwyIb4ET+lhlfW0E0CK/0Fn Kex1mc7J60SjLx8cgvOTUXo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyA8A2GhICZCGZWIiOGJH21THK7AFhzUpCMw5Arjk8kuJz7sKOQkv5tZQNmislLJDkcAVowVg== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:f6c8:: with SMTP id d8mr13070939qvo.234.1583103828249; Sun, 01 Mar 2020 15:03:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from rani.riverdale.lan ([2001:470:1f07:5f3::b55f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e88sm1724022qtd.9.2020.03.01.15.03.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 01 Mar 2020 15:03:47 -0800 (PST) From: Arvind Sankar X-Google-Original-From: Arvind Sankar Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2020 18:03:46 -0500 To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: Arvind Sankar , linux-efi , Hans de Goede , the arch/x86 maintainers Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] efi/x86: add support for generic EFI mixed mode boot Message-ID: <20200301230345.GA2227739@rani.riverdale.lan> References: <20200301172248.GA1851857@rani.riverdale.lan> <20200301200035.GA2031375@rani.riverdale.lan> <20200301205419.GA2116204@rani.riverdale.lan> <20200301220126.GA2204298@rani.riverdale.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-efi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 11:56:44PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 at 23:01, Arvind Sankar wrote: > > > > On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 10:36:05PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 at 21:54, Arvind Sankar wrote: > > > > > I see this in the memory map > > > > > > > > > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem47: [Conventional Memory| | | | | | | | > > > > > | |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x0000000100000000-0x000000013fffffff] > > > > > (1024MB) > > > > > > > > > > so it looks like qemu-system-x86_64 puts the memory in a weird place? > > > > > Or is this expected? > > > > > > > > Mine ended here: > > > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem45: [Memory Mapped I/O |RUN| | | | | | | | | | | |UC] range=[0x00000000ffc00000-0x00000000ffffffff] (4MB) > > > > are you running with -m 3072 or more? > > > > > > > > > > That is not memory, it's some mmio region > > > > > > > Right, but it's the last (highest) range in my memory map. It was just > > to illustrate that I have no addresses above 4Gb, unlike the mapping you > > got, although I now see that the MMIO range is the last one printed > > regardless of where RAM ends, so that wasn't quite enough. I only get > > the 4g-5g mapping range if I run it with -m 4096. > > > > This is the tail end of the mapping I got. > > > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem38: [Conventional Memory| | | | | | | | | |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x00000000bfe00000-0x00000000bfe89fff] (0MB) > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem39: [Boot Data | | | | | | | | | |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x00000000bfe8a000-0x00000000bfea9fff] (0MB) > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem40: [Boot Code | | | | | | | | | |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x00000000bfeaa000-0x00000000bfeccfff] (0MB) > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem41: [Boot Data | | | | | | | | | |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x00000000bfecd000-0x00000000bfed5fff] (0MB) > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem42: [Boot Code | | | | | | | | | |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x00000000bfed6000-0x00000000bfef3fff] (0MB) > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem43: [Runtime Data |RUN| | | | | | | | |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x00000000bfef4000-0x00000000bff77fff] (0MB) > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem44: [ACPI Memory NVS | | | | | | | | | |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x00000000bff78000-0x00000000bfffffff] (0MB) > > [ 0.000000] efi: mem45: [Memory Mapped I/O |RUN| | | | | | | | | | | |UC] range=[0x00000000ffc00000-0x00000000ffffffff] (4MB) > > Looks like it's the difference in machine type - I was using q35, and > when I switch to the default, I can reproduce the early boot crash you > sent the patch for. I don't see the other issue though. So you can boot successfully without hanging in SetVirtualAddressMap? Weird. I'm using QEMU 4.2.0 in case that matters.