xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
To: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	 Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
	 Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@arm.com>,
	wei.chen@arm.com,  Ian Jackson <iwj@xenproject.org>,
	Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>,
	 Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>,
	 xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH-4.16 v2] xen/efi: Fix Grub2 boot on arm64
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 14:50:34 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2111041449180.284830@ubuntu-linux-20-04-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9E52FA33-422B-4B1C-A6AF-601CDF565700@arm.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 11485 bytes --]

On Thu, 4 Nov 2021, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> > On 4 Nov 2021, at 21:35, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 4 Nov 2021, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> >>> On 4 Nov 2021, at 20:56, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> On Thu, 4 Nov 2021, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>> On 04.11.2021 15:12, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> >>>>> --- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> >>>>> +++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> >>>>> @@ -449,6 +449,15 @@ static EFI_FILE_HANDLE __init get_parent_handle(EFI_LOADED_IMAGE *loaded_image,
> >>>>>    CHAR16 *pathend, *ptr;
> >>>>>    EFI_STATUS ret;
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> +    /*
> >>>>> +     * Grub2 running on top of EDK2 has been observed to supply a NULL
> >>>>> +     * DeviceHandle. We can't use that to gain access to the filesystem.
> >>>>> +     * However the system can still boot if it doesn’t require access to the
> >>>>> +     * filesystem.
> >>>>> +     */
> >>>>> +    if ( !loaded_image->DeviceHandle )
> >>>>> +        return NULL;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>>    do {
> >>>>>        EFI_FILE_IO_INTERFACE *fio;
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> @@ -581,6 +590,8 @@ static bool __init read_file(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle, CHAR16 *name,
> >>>>>    EFI_STATUS ret;
> >>>>>    const CHAR16 *what = NULL;
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> +    if ( !dir_handle )
> >>>>> +        blexit(L"Error: No access to the filesystem");
> >>>>>    if ( !name )
> >>>>>        PrintErrMesg(L"No filename", EFI_OUT_OF_RESOURCES);
> >>>>>    ret = dir_handle->Open(dir_handle, &FileHandle, name,
> >>>>> @@ -1333,8 +1344,18 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> >>>>>            EFI_FILE_HANDLE handle = get_parent_handle(loaded_image,
> >>>>>                                                       &file_name);
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> -            handle->Close(handle);
> >>>>> -            *argv = file_name;
> >>>>> +            if ( !handle )
> >>>>> +            {
> >>>>> +                PrintErr(L"Error retrieving image name: no filesystem access."
> >>>>> +                         L" Setting default to xen.efi");
> >>>>> +                PrintErr(newline);
> >>>>> +                *argv = L"xen.efi";
> >>>>> +            }
> >>>>> +            else
> >>>>> +            {
> >>>>> +                handle->Close(handle);
> >>>>> +                *argv = file_name;
> >>>>> +            }
> >>>>>        }
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>        name.s = get_value(&cfg, section.s, "options");
> >>>>> @@ -1369,7 +1390,8 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> >>>>>    /* Get the number of boot modules specified on the DT or an error (<0) */
> >>>>>    dt_modules_found = efi_check_dt_boot(dir_handle);
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> -    dir_handle->Close(dir_handle);
> >>>>> +    if ( dir_handle )
> >>>>> +        dir_handle->Close(dir_handle);
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>    if ( dt_modules_found < 0 )
> >>>>>        /* efi_check_dt_boot throws some error */
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> I'm sorry, but I think we need to take a step back here and revisit
> >>>> the earlier change. If that hadn't moved obtaining dir_handle out by
> >>>> one level of scope, nothing bad would have happened to the case that
> >>>> you're now trying to fix, I understand? So perhaps that part wants
> >>>> undoing, with efi_check_dt_boot() instead getting passed loaded_image.
> >>>> That way, down the call tree the needed handle can be obtained via
> >>>> another call to get_parent_handle(), and quite likely in the scenario
> >>>> you're trying to fix here execution wouldn't even make it there. This
> >>>> then wouldn't be much different to the image name retrieval calling
> >>>> get_parent_handle() a 2nd time, rather than trying to re-use
> >>>> dir_handle.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Net effect being that I think get_parent_handle() would then again
> >>>> only be called when the returned handle is actually needed, and hence
> >>>> when failure of HandleProtocol() (for DeviceHandle being NULL just
> >>>> like for any other reason) is indeed an error that needs reporting.
> >>> 
> >>> In my opinion the current version is good enough. Regardless, I looked
> >>> at your suggestion into details. As it took me some time to understand
> >>> it, I thought I would share the code changes that I think correspond to
> >>> what you wrote. Does everything check out?
> >>> 
> >>> If so, I think it looks fine, maybe a bit better than the current
> >>> version. I'll leave that to you and Luca.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h b/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
> >>> index c3ae9751ab..9dcd8547cd 100644
> >>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
> >>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
> >>> @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
> >>> #include <asm/setup.h>
> >>> #include <asm/smp.h>
> >>> 
> >>> +extern EFI_FILE_HANDLE __init get_parent_handle(EFI_LOADED_IMAGE *loaded_image,
> >>> +                                                CHAR16 **leaf);
> >>> typedef struct {
> >>>    char *name;
> >>>    unsigned int name_len;
> >>> @@ -54,7 +56,7 @@ static int handle_module_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> >>>                              bool is_domu_module);
> >>> static int handle_dom0less_domain_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> >>>                                       int domain_node);
> >>> -static int efi_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle);
> >>> +static int efi_check_dt_boot(EFI_LOADED_IMAGE *loaded_image);
> >>> 
> >>> #define DEVICE_TREE_GUID \
> >>> {0xb1b621d5, 0xf19c, 0x41a5, {0x83, 0x0b, 0xd9, 0x15, 0x2c, 0x69, 0xaa, 0xe0}}
> >>> @@ -851,10 +853,14 @@ static int __init handle_dom0less_domain_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> >>> * dom0 and domU guests to be loaded.
> >>> * Returns the number of multiboot modules found or a negative number for error.
> >>> */
> >>> -static int __init efi_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle)
> >>> +static int __init efi_check_dt_boot(EFI_LOADED_IMAGE *loaded_image)
> >>> {
> >>>    int chosen, node, addr_len, size_len;
> >>>    unsigned int i = 0, modules_found = 0;
> >>> +    EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle;
> >>> +    CHAR16 *file_name;
> >>> +
> >>> +    dir_handle = get_parent_handle(loaded_image, &file_name);
> >> 
> >> We can’t use get_parent_handle here because we will end up with the same problem,
> >> we would need to use the filesystem if and only if we need to use it, 
> > 
> > Understood, but it would work the same way as this version of the patch:
> > if we end up calling read_file with dir_handle == NULL, then read_file
> > would do:
> > 
> >  blexit(L"Error: No access to the filesystem");
> > 
> > If we don't end up calling read_file, then everything works even if
> > dir_handle == NULL. Right?
> 
> Oh yes sorry my bad Stefano! Having this version of the patch, it will work.
> 
> My understanding was instead that the Jan suggestion is to revert the place
> of call of get_parent_handle (like in your code diff), but also to remove the
> changes to get_parent_handle and read_file.
> I guess Jan will specify his preference, but if he meant the last one, then
> the only way I see...

I think we should keep the changes to get_parent_handle and read_file,
otherwise it will make it awkward, and those changes are good in their
own right anyway.
 
 
> >> so the way I see
> >> is to pass loaded_image down to the stack until allocate_module_file(…), in this
> >> function we can use get_parent_handle(…) because the user wants us to do that.
> >> The downside is that we must close the handle there, so for each loaded file we will
> >> request and close the handle. Is this something we don’t bother too much?
> > 
> > Yeah, that doesn't seem ideal.
> 
> … is this one.
> 
> > 
> > 
> >>> 
> >>>    /* Check for the chosen node in the current DTB */
> >>>    chosen = setup_chosen_node(fdt, &addr_len, &size_len);
> >>> @@ -895,6 +901,8 @@ static int __init efi_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle)
> >>>        efi_bs->FreePool(modules[i].name);
> >>>    }
> >>> 
> >>> +    dir_handle->Close(dir_handle);
> >>> +
> >>>    return modules_found;
> >>> }
> >>> 
> >>> diff --git a/xen/common/efi/boot.c b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> >>> index 112b7e7571..2407671a7d 100644
> >>> --- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> >>> +++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> >>> @@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ static void __init PrintErr(const CHAR16 *s)
> >>> }
> >>> 
> >>> #ifndef CONFIG_HAS_DEVICE_TREE
> >>> -static int __init efi_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle)
> >>> +static int __init efi_check_dt_boot(EFI_LOADED_IMAGE *loaded_image)
> >>> {
> >>>    return 0;
> >>> }
> >>> @@ -439,8 +439,8 @@ static unsigned int __init get_argv(unsigned int argc, CHAR16 **argv,
> >>>    return argc;
> >>> }
> >>> 
> >>> -static EFI_FILE_HANDLE __init get_parent_handle(EFI_LOADED_IMAGE *loaded_image,
> >>> -                                                CHAR16 **leaf)
> >>> +EFI_FILE_HANDLE __init get_parent_handle(EFI_LOADED_IMAGE *loaded_image,
> >>> +                                         CHAR16 **leaf)
> >>> {
> >>>    static EFI_GUID __initdata fs_protocol = SIMPLE_FILE_SYSTEM_PROTOCOL;
> >>>    static CHAR16 __initdata buffer[512];
> >>> @@ -1236,9 +1236,6 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> >>> 
> >>>    efi_arch_relocate_image(0);
> >>> 
> >>> -    /* Get the file system interface. */
> >>> -    dir_handle = get_parent_handle(loaded_image, &file_name);
> >>> -
> >>>    if ( use_cfg_file )
> >>>    {
> >>>        UINTN depth, cols, rows, size;
> >>> @@ -1251,6 +1248,9 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> >>> 
> >>>        gop = efi_get_gop();
> >>> 
> >>> +        /* Get the file system interface. */
> >>> +        dir_handle = get_parent_handle(loaded_image, &file_name);
> >>> +
> >>>        /* Read and parse the config file. */
> >>>        if ( read_section(loaded_image, L"config", &cfg, NULL) )
> >>>            PrintStr(L"Using builtin config file\r\n");
> >>> @@ -1344,18 +1344,8 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> >>>            EFI_FILE_HANDLE handle = get_parent_handle(loaded_image,
> >>>                                                       &file_name);
> >>> 
> >>> -            if ( !handle )
> >>> -            {
> >>> -                PrintErr(L"Error retrieving image name: no filesystem access."
> >>> -                         L" Setting default to xen.efi");
> >>> -                PrintErr(newline);
> >>> -                *argv = L"xen.efi";
> >>> -            }
> >>> -            else
> >>> -            {
> >>> -                handle->Close(handle);
> >>> -                *argv = file_name;
> >>> -            }
> >>> +            handle->Close(handle);
> >>> +            *argv = file_name;
> >>>        }
> >>> 
> >>>        name.s = get_value(&cfg, section.s, "options");
> >>> @@ -1383,15 +1373,14 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> >>>        efi_bs->FreePages(cfg.addr, PFN_UP(cfg.size));
> >>>        cfg.addr = 0;
> >>> 
> >>> +        dir_handle->Close(dir_handle);
> >>> +
> >>>        if ( gop && !base_video )
> >>>            gop_mode = efi_find_gop_mode(gop, cols, rows, depth);
> >>>    }
> >>> 
> >>>    /* Get the number of boot modules specified on the DT or an error (<0) */
> >>> -    dt_modules_found = efi_check_dt_boot(dir_handle);
> >>> -
> >>> -    if ( dir_handle )
> >>> -        dir_handle->Close(dir_handle);
> >>> +    dt_modules_found = efi_check_dt_boot(loaded_image);
> >>> 
> >>>    if ( dt_modules_found < 0 )
> >>>        /* efi_check_dt_boot throws some error */
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2021-11-04 21:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-04 14:12 [PATCH-4.16 v2] xen/efi: Fix Grub2 boot on arm64 Luca Fancellu
2021-11-04 14:33 ` Bertrand Marquis
2021-11-04 14:44   ` Ian Jackson
2021-11-04 16:36 ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-04 20:56   ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-11-04 21:07     ` Luca Fancellu
2021-11-04 21:35       ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-11-04 21:43         ` Luca Fancellu
2021-11-04 21:50           ` Stefano Stabellini [this message]
2021-11-05  7:35             ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-05 15:33               ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-11-08  7:25                 ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-09  2:11                   ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-11-09  9:23                     ` Luca Fancellu
2021-11-09 11:01                       ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-09 11:00                     ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-09 21:52                       ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-11-09 22:31                         ` Julien Grall
2021-11-10  7:40                         ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-10 13:05                         ` Luca Fancellu
2021-11-10 13:36                           ` Julien Grall
2021-11-10 14:02                             ` Luca Fancellu
2021-11-15 18:57                               ` Julien Grall
2021-11-15 22:00                                 ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-11-16  8:36                                   ` Luca Fancellu
2021-11-16 15:08                                     ` Ian Jackson
2021-11-16 16:11                                       ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-16 16:23                                       ` Julien Grall
2021-11-05  7:32           ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-05  7:27     ` Jan Beulich
2021-11-04 20:51 ` Stefano Stabellini

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=alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2111041449180.284830@ubuntu-linux-20-04-desktop \
    --to=sstabellini@kernel.org \
    --cc=Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com \
    --cc=bertrand.marquis@arm.com \
    --cc=iwj@xenproject.org \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=julien@xen.org \
    --cc=luca.fancellu@arm.com \
    --cc=wei.chen@arm.com \
    --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 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).