All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: Re: (overlapping) lmb allocations during boot
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:51:16 +0100 (CET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d3caa16079f515ea@bloch.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1f9f258db11b21bfd7db4fe1eef785eb@walle.cc> (message from Michael Walle on Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:04:40 +0100)

> Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:04:40 +0100
> From: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
> 
> Am 2021-10-31 12:44, schrieb Mark Kettenis:
> >> Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 11:43:38 +0100
> >> From: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
> >> 
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> I sometimes see a corrupted initrd during kernel boot on my board
> >> (kontron_sl28). Debugging showed that in this case the spin table
> >> for the secondary CPUs overlaps with the lmb initrd allocations
> >> (initrd_high is set).
> >> 
> >> I had a look at how the fdt and initrd are relocated (if enabled). In
> >> summary, they use lmb_alloc() which will first add all available 
> >> memory
> >> and then carve out reserved regions. There are calls for arch
> >> (arch_lmb_reserve()) and board (board_lmb_reserve()) callbacks. The
> >> interesting thing is that, there is also code to carve out any
> >> reserved regions which were added to the fdt earlier
> >> (boot_fdt_add_mem_rsv_regions()). The problem here is, that the DT
> >> fixups,
> >> which might add the reserved regions are called just before jumping to
> >> linux. Thus both the allocation for the fdt (if fdt_high is set) and
> >> the ramdisk (if initrd_high is set) will ignore any reserved memory
> >> regions.
> >> 
> >> Unfortunately, I don't see any good way to fix this. You'd need all 
> >> the
> >> DT fixups before we can initialize the lmb. Also, I don't know if this
> >> will affect any other areas; probably I'm the only one, who reserves 
> >> an
> >> area which is outside of the u-boot code and data segment.
> >> 
> >> A hackish way would be to carve out the spin_table code in
> >> board_lmb_reserve(). But meh..
> > 
> > The spin table is embedded in the u-boot binary itself isn't it?  But
> > the memory occupied by the u-boot should already be reserved...
> 
> Yes it is. As long as it doen't overlap with the 64k EFI code page.
> See below.

Yes, I saw the comment.  Which confuses me.  The overlap itself
shouldn't be a problem since both the spin table and the EFI runtime
code page should be preserved.  But I guess that the overlap causes
problems later on because attempting to reserve overlapping areas
fails?

> > Unless CONFIG_EFI_LOADER is defined.  Then it relocates the spin table
> > to memory allocated using efi_allocate_pages().  But that function
> > only looks at the EFI memory map to figure out what memory is
> > available.  So I suspect that it might hand out the same memory as
> > lmb_alloc().  It all looks a bit broken to me...
> 
> Yes, that is actually my code ;) The kontron_sl28 is the only
> board which uses spin tables as far as I know. It doesn't support
> PSCI; at least if you don't load a bl31 TF-A. Therefore, for SMP
> it uses spin tables. The relocation code work arounds a problem
> with the reserved EFI code, see [1].
> 
> And yes, it actually is broken. But so might be every code which
> is using the efi_allocate_pages(), no? LMB isn't global, but is
> just initialized at different places. Like before a linux kernel
> is booted or when you load a file (?). And everytime the whole
> memory is added, and then different regions are carved out (see
> above).

Right.  So it mostly works because U-Boot either ends up using a code
path where it uses LMB or a path where it ends up using the EFI memory
map, but never both.  Except if it hits your layerscape code.

I think the right way to solve this is to allocate the memory for the
spin table through some other means and use efi_add_memory_map() to
reserve that memory like what is done in board/raspberrypi/rpi/rpi.c.

Or don't relocate the spin table and fix the issue with overlapping
reserves.

Cheers,

Mark

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-31 12:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-31 10:43 (overlapping) lmb allocations during boot Michael Walle
2021-10-31 11:44 ` Mark Kettenis
2021-10-31 12:04   ` Michael Walle
2021-10-31 12:51     ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2021-10-31 15:19       ` Michael Walle
2021-10-31 17:36         ` Mark Kettenis
2021-10-31 22:48           ` Michael Walle

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=d3caa16079f515ea@bloch.sibelius.xs4all.nl \
    --to=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
    --cc=michael@walle.cc \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.