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 Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0167C2BD09 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 06:24:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.755845.1164332 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sR4HA-0006Ej-Cq; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 06:24:32 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 755845.1164332; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 06:24:32 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sR4HA-0006Ec-8k; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 06:24:32 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 755845; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 06:24:31 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-flk1-in.inumbo.com ([94.247.172.50] helo=se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sR4H9-0006EW-3F for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 06:24:31 +0000 Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com (mail-lj1-x234.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::234]) by se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id e530b298-3dbb-11ef-8776-851b0ebba9a2; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:24:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2eeb1ba0481so13526201fa.2 for ; Mon, 08 Jul 2024 23:24:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.156.60.236] (ip-037-024-206-209.um08.pools.vodafone-ip.de. [37.24.206.209]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 41be03b00d2f7-77d61c00772sm796590a12.43.2024.07.08.23.24.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Jul 2024 23:24:27 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: e530b298-3dbb-11ef-8776-851b0ebba9a2 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1720506268; x=1721111068; darn=lists.xenproject.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:autocrypt:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=vEwkiHNqgbSeryv9qOaLaWb0nJxDnDujfLULPhV/H+Q=; b=FIunBp5GAFbOqBa83i3Cn6jNRSauD9Ssp5cMraKamu4TTA6NmDjBzFx7APq0PrBvzp bM/aBtHs1rGNFY7Ax70azfHRGz4WW/GFfwQoYDNhs6esuXBCTR8GQl004ERSR3FIWC91 a6CxDNljszzIlAWx2eX/GgaBgHCbQ1k07K5qMamqqqs7epESOAnVJpn7F8eBc6ucD1UX C1seTKNAUvmm5SL8nN6OHeIXcSIpX5lFsSkh+hTr2es9ppUMMpqc0WDOI9/+KmHTaDSa fyith6cjWHuSPF3PVpJZtOFFp03b0JMxvY/0DPTGRx895Suo+vBtciXufhaCaPQ24HDP Yscg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1720506268; x=1721111068; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:autocrypt:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=vEwkiHNqgbSeryv9qOaLaWb0nJxDnDujfLULPhV/H+Q=; b=txyuXuZd6BE9H4KO6LyPu7hGTHCXNzwOEmhY9lhDsF7j4E+FzKmaeC6a0BFugWOiwJ p07Uz6ovmxWcQ2sZdxvOW2iwfE6jq6ZUNaWMEBWs6lqjuiXhLDCL6BjbbF/qlwfki7+j 32rFUcpecwcVdtSlCilmy4ILk2lu1gRBKC5014xnI6cjlUZVHI6U8kEpJojNDYGGnRhN Ct9biLX/tSnm8kFO+59z1Uv25nGfpbd6MVGhbu1VbAV6jdSRtJzpeLH/K/8KM7Y+vUIU QlqHgw6UFcAx8D68xHhjZnAYtVHYnUQ5c2nmNDWaxx9XFfeYQM1Kob6O5cFmsdjMFzI+ /Arg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWTgYNykWINhU9VduA2QP7qAuQZDR4/2lPXLz1FAjI+8PwUSWVKGNlYy6BZzdq8dx8twwBGV9Ejyo51/xwsKaOgy2shTbJx5TajyyrQHm8= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwzxZauQBtqux68bcma+o4wLeH6BAhEJim5xhguF7ZsrfUcGMvt DQl+mcrwSRLztcvOV+l6VZ1seqtaPHITN0Plu2EjyUry77Mu7iuaXVV1f2JAFQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE3LF8hfpNLSMSSPWqWUkfiVGomFnbLr7m2kI1sM/4iiK+ulpaUDdPJbphGBmkrasuO35ZnGQ== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7c0a:0:b0:2ee:8407:2f58 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2eeb30e5110mr10075831fa.17.1720506268043; Mon, 08 Jul 2024 23:24:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1f96a355-b0d2-4cc9-a2ae-6d3ab750136d@suse.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 08:24:20 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Problems in PV dom0 on recent x86 hardware To: Jason Andryuk Cc: =?UTF-8?B?SsO8cmdlbiBHcm/Dnw==?= , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= References: <6101999a-6f88-46cb-b850-af43b364f299@suse.com> <7a0a8b1c-69e0-435d-b4f4-7a9d784eab29@amd.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Jan Beulich Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@suse.com; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL In-Reply-To: <7a0a8b1c-69e0-435d-b4f4-7a9d784eab29@amd.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 08.07.2024 23:30, Jason Andryuk wrote: > On 2024-07-08 05:12, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 08.07.2024 11:08, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 10:37:22AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 08.07.2024 10:15, Jürgen Groß wrote: >>>>> I've got an internal report about failures in dom0 when booting with >>>>> Xen on a Thinkpad P14s Gen 3 AMD (kernel 6.9). >>>>> >>>>> With some debugging I've found that the UCSI driver seems to fail to >>>>> map MFN feec2 as iomem, as the hypervisor is denying this mapping due >>>>> to being part of the MSI space. The mapping attempt seems to be the >>>>> result of an ACPI call of the UCSI driver: >>>>> >>>>> [ 44.575345] RIP: e030:xen_mc_flush+0x1e8/0x2b0 >>>>> [ 44.575418] xen_leave_lazy_mmu+0x15/0x60 >>>>> [ 44.575425] vmap_range_noflush+0x408/0x6f0 >>>>> [ 44.575438] __ioremap_caller+0x20d/0x350 >>>>> [ 44.575450] acpi_os_map_iomem+0x1a3/0x1c0 >>>>> [ 44.575454] acpi_ex_system_memory_space_handler+0x229/0x3f0 >>>>> [ 44.575464] acpi_ev_address_space_dispatch+0x17e/0x4c0 >>>>> [ 44.575474] acpi_ex_access_region+0x28a/0x510 >>>>> [ 44.575479] acpi_ex_field_datum_io+0x95/0x5c0 >>>>> [ 44.575482] acpi_ex_extract_from_field+0x36b/0x4e0 >>>>> [ 44.575490] acpi_ex_read_data_from_field+0xcb/0x430 >>>>> [ 44.575493] acpi_ex_resolve_node_to_value+0x2e0/0x530 >>>>> [ 44.575496] acpi_ex_resolve_to_value+0x1e7/0x550 >>>>> [ 44.575499] acpi_ds_evaluate_name_path+0x107/0x170 >>>>> [ 44.575505] acpi_ds_exec_end_op+0x392/0x860 >>>>> [ 44.575508] acpi_ps_parse_loop+0x268/0xa30 >>>>> [ 44.575515] acpi_ps_parse_aml+0x221/0x5e0 >>>>> [ 44.575518] acpi_ps_execute_method+0x171/0x3e0 >>>>> [ 44.575522] acpi_ns_evaluate+0x174/0x5d0 >>>>> [ 44.575525] acpi_evaluate_object+0x167/0x440 >>>>> [ 44.575529] acpi_evaluate_dsm+0xb6/0x130 >>>>> [ 44.575541] ucsi_acpi_dsm+0x53/0x80 >>>>> [ 44.575546] ucsi_acpi_read+0x2e/0x60 >>>>> [ 44.575550] ucsi_register+0x24/0xa0 >>>>> [ 44.575555] ucsi_acpi_probe+0x162/0x1e3 >>>>> [ 44.575559] platform_probe+0x48/0x90 >>>>> [ 44.575567] really_probe+0xde/0x340 >>>>> [ 44.575579] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x110 >>>>> [ 44.575581] driver_probe_device+0x1f/0x90 >>>>> [ 44.575584] __driver_attach+0xd2/0x1c0 >>>>> [ 44.575587] bus_for_each_dev+0x77/0xc0 >>>>> [ 44.575590] bus_add_driver+0x112/0x1f0 >>>>> [ 44.575593] driver_register+0x72/0xd0 >>>>> [ 44.575600] do_one_initcall+0x48/0x300 >>>>> [ 44.575607] do_init_module+0x60/0x220 >>>>> [ 44.575615] __do_sys_init_module+0x17f/0x1b0 >>>>> [ 44.575623] do_syscall_64+0x82/0x170 >>>>> [ 44.575685] 1 of 1 multicall(s) failed: cpu 4 >>>>> [ 44.575695] call 1: op=1 result=-1 caller=xen_extend_mmu_update+0x4e/0xd0 >>>>> pars=ffff888267e25ad0 1 0 7ff0 args=9ba37a678 80000000feec2073 >>>>> >>>>> The pte value of the mmu_update call is 80000000feec2073, which is rejected by >>>>> the hypervisor with -EPERM. >>>>> >>>>> Before diving deep into the UCSI internals, is it possible that the hypervisor >>>>> needs some update (IOW: could it be the mapping attempt should rather be >>>>> honored, as there might be an I/O resources at this position which dom0 needs >>>>> to access for using the related hardware?) >>>> >>>> Adding to Andrew's reply: Is there any BAR in the system covering that address? >>>> Or is it rather ACPI "making up" that address (which would remind me of IO-APIC >>>> space being accessed by certain incarnations of ACPI, resulting in similar >>>> issues)? >>> >>> So you think ACPI is using some kind of backdoor to access the local >>> APIC registers? >> >> No, I'm wondering if they're trying to access *something*. As it stands we >> don't even know what kind of access is intended; all we know is that they're >> trying to map that page (and maybe adjacent ones). > > From the backtrace, it looks like the immediate case is just trying to > read a 4-byte version: > > >>>> [ 44.575541] ucsi_acpi_dsm+0x53/0x80 > >>>> [ 44.575546] ucsi_acpi_read+0x2e/0x60 > >>>> [ 44.575550] ucsi_register+0x24/0xa0 > >>>> [ 44.575555] ucsi_acpi_probe+0x162/0x1e3 > > int ucsi_register(struct ucsi *ucsi) > { > int ret; > > ret = ucsi->ops->read(ucsi, UCSI_VERSION, &ucsi->version, > sizeof(ucsi->version)); > > ->read being ucsi_acpi_read() > > However, the driver also appears write to adjacent addresses. There are also corresponding write functions in the driver, yes, but ucsi_acpi_async_write() (used directly or indirectly) similarly calls ucsi_acpi_dsm(), which wires through to acpi_evaluate_dsm(). That's ACPI object evaluation, which isn't obvious without seeing the involved AML whether it might write said memory region. The writing done in the write function(s) looks to be memcpy(ua->base + offset, val, val_len); with their read counterpart being memcpy(val, ua->base + offset, val_len); where ua->base may well be an entirely different address (looks like it's the first of the BARs as per ucsi_acpi_probe()). If acpi_evaluate_dsm() would only ever read the region, an option (if all else fails) might be to similarly (to what we do for IO-APICs) permit read accesses / mappings (by inserting the range into mmio_ro_ranges). Yet of course first we need to better understand what's actually going on here. Jan