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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C1DC433FE for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 11:46:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231299AbiKCLqz (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2022 07:46:55 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55948 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231361AbiKCLqx (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2022 07:46:53 -0400 Received: from mta-01.yadro.com (mta-02.yadro.com [89.207.88.252]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FD5A6179; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 04:46:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mta-01.yadro.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A3F4121C; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 11:46:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=yadro.com; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:from:from :in-reply-to:references:content-language:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received :received:received; s=mta-01; t=1667476007; x=1669290408; bh=eoK R130ErlyvUvIirtpY2L+Sg/WGGSj8xuIXHUW2mOs=; b=D83shAGuNCbaWiFn3ar +sDojxN5/3v3LPa7Mxj2O/hNw8Vyj0jIJQkHi+z92Dff68p4jSxDIfh8RNhdFTvL yreGyps92vdJAqwN9x8lapSMjqpqKNf9AGbxePuPE9x0JCZBUHJOftf7SuoPvw1G iFDZJ/nyOD7I0OAcqsKrz9mc= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at yadro.com Received: from mta-01.yadro.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta-01.yadro.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 13MqH0Om6Tze; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 14:46:47 +0300 (MSK) Received: from T-EXCH-02.corp.yadro.com (T-EXCH-02.corp.yadro.com [172.17.10.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mta-01.yadro.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 685FE41246; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 14:46:39 +0300 (MSK) Received: from T-EXCH-08.corp.yadro.com (172.17.11.58) by T-EXCH-02.corp.yadro.com (172.17.10.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.669.32; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 14:46:39 +0300 Received: from [10.199.21.212] (10.199.21.212) by T-EXCH-08.corp.yadro.com (172.17.11.58) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.2.1118.9; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 14:46:38 +0300 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2022 14:46:37 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.2 Subject: Re: RISC-V reserved memory problems Content-Language: en-US To: , CC: , , , , , , , , , , , References: <8e10bf15-9fa9-fe90-1656-35bf3e87e7f8@microchip.com> In-Reply-To: From: Evgenii Shatokhin Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.199.21.212] X-ClientProxiedBy: T-EXCH-01.corp.yadro.com (172.17.10.101) To T-EXCH-08.corp.yadro.com (172.17.11.58) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 16.08.2022 23:41, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote: > Hey all, > We've run into a bit of a problem with reserved memory on PolarFire, or > more accurately a pair of problems that seem to have opposite fixes. > > The first of these problems is triggered when trying to implement a > remoteproc driver. To get the reserved memory buffer, remoteproc > does an of_reserved_mem_lookup(), something like: > > np = of_parse_phandle(pdev->of_node, "memory-region", 0); > if (!np) > return -EINVAL; > > rmem = of_reserved_mem_lookup(np); > if (!rmem) > return -EINVAL; > > of_reserved_mem_lookup() then uses reserved_mem[i].name to try and find > a match - but this was triggering kernel panics for us. We did some > debugging and found that the name string's pointer was pointing to an > address in the 0x4000_0000 range. The minimum reproduction for this > crash is attached - it hacks in some print_reserved_mem()s into > setup_vm_final() around a tlb flush so you can see the before/after. > (You'll need a reserved memory node in your dts to replicate) > > The output is like so, with the same crash as in the remoteproc driver: > > [ 0.000000] Linux version 6.0.0-rc1-00001-g0d9d6953d834 (conor@wendy) (riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc (g5964b5cd727) 11.1.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.37) #1 SMP Tue Aug 16 13:42:09 IST 2022 > [ 0.000000] OF: fdt: Ignoring memory range 0x80000000 - 0x80200000 > [ 0.000000] Machine model: Microchip PolarFire-SoC Icicle Kit > [ 0.000000] earlycon: ns16550a0 at MMIO32 0x0000000020100000 (options '115200n8') > [ 0.000000] printk: bootconsole [ns16550a0] enabled > [ 0.000000] printk: debug: skip boot console de-registration. > [ 0.000000] efi: UEFI not found. > [ 0.000000] before flush > [ 0.000000] OF: reserved mem: debug name is fabricbuf@ae000000 > [ 0.000000] after flush > [ 0.000000] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 00000000401c31ac > [ 0.000000] Oops [#1] > [ 0.000000] Modules linked in: > [ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 6.0.0-rc1-00001-g0d9d6953d834 #1 > [ 0.000000] Hardware name: Microchip PolarFire-SoC Icicle Kit (DT) > [ 0.000000] epc : string+0x4a/0xea > [ 0.000000] ra : vsnprintf+0x1e4/0x336 > [ 0.000000] epc : ffffffff80335ea0 ra : ffffffff80338936 sp : ffffffff81203be0 > [ 0.000000] gp : ffffffff812e0a98 tp : ffffffff8120de40 t0 : 0000000000000000 > [ 0.000000] t1 : ffffffff81203e28 t2 : 7265736572203a46 s0 : ffffffff81203c20 > [ 0.000000] s1 : ffffffff81203e28 a0 : ffffffff81203d22 a1 : 0000000000000000 > [ 0.000000] a2 : ffffffff81203d08 a3 : 0000000081203d21 a4 : ffffffffffffffff > [ 0.000000] a5 : 00000000401c31ac a6 : ffff0a00ffffff04 a7 : ffffffffffffffff > [ 0.000000] s2 : ffffffff81203d08 s3 : ffffffff81203d00 s4 : 0000000000000008 > [ 0.000000] s5 : ffffffff000000ff s6 : 0000000000ffffff s7 : 00000000ffffff00 > [ 0.000000] s8 : ffffffff80d9821a s9 : ffffffff81203d22 s10: 0000000000000002 > [ 0.000000] s11: ffffffff80d9821c t3 : ffffffff812f3617 t4 : ffffffff812f3617 > [ 0.000000] t5 : ffffffff812f3618 t6 : ffffffff81203d08 > [ 0.000000] status: 0000000200000100 badaddr: 00000000401c31ac cause: 000000000000000d > [ 0.000000] [] vsnprintf+0x1e4/0x336 > [ 0.000000] [] vprintk_store+0xf6/0x344 > [ 0.000000] [] vprintk_emit+0x56/0x192 > [ 0.000000] [] vprintk_default+0x16/0x1e > [ 0.000000] [] vprintk+0x72/0x80 > [ 0.000000] [] _printk+0x36/0x50 > [ 0.000000] [] print_reserved_mem+0x1c/0x24 > [ 0.000000] [] paging_init+0x528/0x5bc > [ 0.000000] [] setup_arch+0xd0/0x592 > [ 0.000000] [] start_kernel+0x82/0x73c > [ 0.000000] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- > [ 0.000000] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! > [ 0.000000] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]--- > > We traced this back to early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem() in > setup_bootmem() - moving it later back up the boot sequence to > after the dt has been remapped etc has fixed the problem for us. > > The least movement to get it working is attached, and also pushed > here: git.kernel.org/conor/c/1735589baefc Any updates on this? I have encountered the same issue with invalid reserved_mem[i].name pointers recently, while working on a remoteproc driver for our RISC-V-based SoC. I can confirm that "riscv: fix reserved memory setup" (git.kernel.org/conor/c/1735589baefc) fixes the issue in our kernel based on 5.15.x. Your patch does not seem to have any adverse side-effects either, so: Tested-by: Evgenii Shatokhin If there are newer versions or variants of the fix, I'll be glad to test them too. By the way, I wonder why arm and aarch64 do not seem to be affected by the issue. As far as I can see, these architectures also populate reserved_mem[] before switching to the final memory mapping during kernel init. I have not dug deep into that though. > > The second problem is a bit more complicated to explain - but we > found the solution conflicted with the remoteproc fix as we had > to move early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem() _earlier_ in the boot > process to solve this one. > > We want to have a node in our devicetree that contains some memory > that is non-cached & marked as reserved-memory. Maybe we have just > missed something, but from what we've seen: > - the really early setup looks at the dtb, picks the highest bit > of memory and puts the dtb etc there so it can start using it > - early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem() is then called, which figures > out if memory is reserved or not. > > Unfortunately, the highest bit of memory is the non-cached bit so > everything falls over, but we can avoid this by moving the call to > early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem() above the dtb memblock alloc that > takes place right before it in setup_bootmem(). > > Obviously, both of these changes are moving the function call in > opposite directions and we can only really do one of them. We are not > sure if what we are doing with the non-cached reserved-memory section > is just not permitted & cannot work - or if this is something that > was overlooked for RISC-V specifically and works for other archs. > > It does seem like the first issue is a real bug, and I am happy to > submit the patch for that whenever - but having two problems with > opposite fixes seemed as if there was something else lurking that we > just don't have enough understanding to detect. > > Any help would be great! > > Thanks, > Conor. > > > Regards, Evgenii