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 ED3E3C2BD09 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 07:35:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.755935.1164473 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sR5NY-0008Pq-9c; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 07:35:12 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 755935.1164473; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 07:35:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sR5NY-0008Pj-53; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 07:35:12 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 755935; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 07:35:11 +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 1sR5NX-0008Pd-4E for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 07:35:11 +0000 Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) by se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id c4892f55-3dc5-11ef-8776-851b0ebba9a2; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 09:35:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52e9944764fso5378753e87.3 for ; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:35:08 -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 d9443c01a7336-1fbb6a1196fsm10184495ad.14.2024.07.09.00.35.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:35:07 -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: c4892f55-3dc5-11ef-8776-851b0ebba9a2 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1720510508; x=1721115308; 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=zegzEt2S4uVcBUXWBtsiFMcpR6mrlx4DASggusc1k+w=; b=CQtbYTM2WkGL+TIKNyOW1jK40yWbuLQQk/pJ4RSW9Ggyar15Sthc+/9gHo3NHqYbe8 dTjTlNKopk01175KoWqZ1lkfHHrlqDQjPZwIA76JgHgm7nUvcCy0pLySmhsreWWdeZjf GWtClETPWTlzYwD+HWG4Kk2jJa9eB0BRJrEk23H5+IktxveqU87gzi2yNYLlwng+1Kvs yDTc7dZvMUg18xOt+/zhyWdHIvrUPE8gD3VRn3MdNBzXQgGJbGn4iWsBX3IVLj+kiOo2 VHtfvdkVvLGp74XwJxtR4PSzuRkBEmoTP0y7vk06jd2kTaTtE4GapR3JFuIYklxLS320 I1qQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1720510508; x=1721115308; 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=zegzEt2S4uVcBUXWBtsiFMcpR6mrlx4DASggusc1k+w=; b=fHFJ5cB5O0jK8EfmntLQ3rp1k7Wz++JzpKXLyeSqgxlsujwNYsYqpJK3z0ov7Kzxjr SFzUsiPjls8Y0Hf9qeKFpbuHOdRO2safM2rTqvM1qYJfM4QIk87FA/F/yQh+oA6YJCWt 6t5Vz6pbeJ1sYjcpYDnO7+HKqYQIO9oxpI0fqzSaACfq+eXyuctfhXn7CsbJPejQxx5F OJHRfOMzSyGpYriweEvfJwQozrL63DxUUtAxOlkBoIlbGPQ4juSmgjfe+S+e6gUFd+Tt 3WmxVb5vzQkpiQREe/lmHeSRQxM1Hlk3jES0pJZgcj4rujwSbo11G4S0jdjiQdH7nQkT RNdQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUxLmVU2H6PaWh/W5E63SUSgRSoTvu7xYF7m5IGuRfonzebTPoJEtzLMlhpo6sdHHQwDThloLItwwWyPnKjfpTqg+h6J2d7TIYTTFg7ReY= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy2piP4Gvm6oA6kKnPjRKeXsW/ZgAsB8APelrNRE3EruOqXTS4C HijXpPCHaCFeJ16vXURYVLSvMQEMoAS1jHoSIQUPAg6Grj+3L6NoQleN+JABhQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHTf93zmVxlYJwC+IkI8H+Mrj2V7bu29CTZX/tbFRtzHoZhSCkVGPBMOufkk0bAWX0htlGwZQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4e09:0:b0:52e:9ebe:7318 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52eb99cb09amr1236703e87.43.1720510508185; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:35:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 09:35:00 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Problems in PV dom0 on recent x86 hardware To: =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= Cc: Jason Andryuk , =?UTF-8?B?SsO8cmdlbiBHcm/Dnw==?= , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" References: <6101999a-6f88-46cb-b850-af43b364f299@suse.com> <7a0a8b1c-69e0-435d-b4f4-7a9d784eab29@amd.com> <1f96a355-b0d2-4cc9-a2ae-6d3ab750136d@suse.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: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 09.07.2024 09:13, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 08:24:20AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> 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. > > When accessing from the CPU, what's in this range apart from the first > page (0xfee00) being the APIC MMIO window in xAPIC mode? That's simply unknown from all I know, the entire 1Mb (or even 2Mb) range is reserved, I think. Thing is we can't very well think "CPU only" as long as we mirror CPU side mappings to the IOMMU page tables. Jan