From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-team@fb.com,
"kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kexec regression since 4.9 caused by efi
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:25:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu-tGaM=fCitv1h7qcM7V9qk9yTjM6-zrvsQq2ZscuqbxQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170317020951.GA3942@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
On 17 March 2017 at 02:09, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 03/16/17 at 12:41pm, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Mar, at 03:37:48PM, Dave Young wrote:
>> >
>> > Omar, could you try below patch? Looking at the efi_mem_desc_lookup, it is not
>> > correct to be used in efi_arch_mem_reserve, if it passed your test, I
>> > can rewrite patch log with more background and send it out:
>> >
>> > for_each_efi_memory_desc(md) {
>> > [snip]
>> > if (!(md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME) &&
>> > md->type != EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA &&
>> > md->type != EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA) {
>> > continue;
>> > }
>> >
>> > In above code, it meant to get a md of EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME of either boot
>> > data or runtime data, this is wrong for efi_mem_reserve, because we are
>> > reserving boot data which has no EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME attribute at the
>> > running time. Just is happened to work and we did not capture the error.
>>
>> Wouldn't something like this be simpler?
>>
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c
>> index 30031d5293c4..cdfe8c628959 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c
>> @@ -201,6 +201,10 @@ void __init efi_arch_mem_reserve(phys_addr_t addr, u64 size)
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> + /* No need to reserve regions that will never be freed. */
>> + if (md.attribute & EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME)
>> + return;
>> +
>
> Matt, I think it should be fine although I think the md type checking in
> efi_mem_desc_lookup() is causing confusion and not easy to understand..
>
> How about move the if chunk early like below because it seems no need
> to sanity check the addr + size any more if the md is still RUNTIME?
>
> --- linux-x86.orig/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c
> +++ linux-x86/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c
> @@ -196,6 +196,10 @@ void __init efi_arch_mem_reserve(phys_ad
> return;
> }
>
> + /* No need to reserve regions that will never be freed. */
> + if (md.attribute & EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME)
> + return;
> +
> if (addr + size > md.phys_addr + (md.num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT)) {
> pr_err("Region spans EFI memory descriptors, %pa\n", &addr);
> return;
>
This way, we suppress the error it the region spans multiple
descriptors, and only the first one has the runtime attribute. So the
two patches are not equivalent. I don't have a strong preference
either way, though.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-17 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-08 20:16 kexec regression since 4.9 caused by efi Omar Sandoval
2017-03-09 2:21 ` Dave Young
2017-03-09 3:36 ` Omar Sandoval
2017-03-09 6:38 ` Dave Young
2017-03-09 9:54 ` Omar Sandoval
2017-03-09 11:53 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-10 1:39 ` Dave Young
2017-03-16 12:15 ` Matt Fleming
2017-03-10 1:42 ` Dave Young
2017-03-13 7:37 ` Dave Young
2017-03-16 12:41 ` Matt Fleming
2017-03-16 17:50 ` Omar Sandoval
2017-04-03 23:54 ` Omar Sandoval
2017-03-17 2:09 ` Dave Young
2017-03-17 13:25 ` Ard Biesheuvel [this message]
2017-03-17 13:32 ` Matt Fleming
2017-03-20 2:14 ` Dave Young
2017-03-21 7:48 ` Dave Young
2017-03-22 16:10 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-23 2:43 ` Dave Young
2017-04-04 13:37 ` Matt Fleming
2017-04-05 1:23 ` Dave Young
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='CAKv+Gu-tGaM=fCitv1h7qcM7V9qk9yTjM6-zrvsQq2ZscuqbxQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=osandov@osandov.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).