From: Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: EFI mixed mode + perf = rampant triple faults
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:37:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141231183739.GA28946@console-pimps.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUyw5_E+FN8o8ZsOxN5XG81-Q8MVzeUHPZ_XBM+ifi6_w@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 17 Dec, at 08:54:56AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> [trying again with .org spelled correctly. also cc: bpetkov]
>
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> > I figured I should send this email before I forget about this issue:
> >
> > If you run perf record across any EFI mixed mode call or otherwise
> > receive an NMI or MCE, the machine triple-faults. The cause is
> > straightforward: there is no valid IDT when we have long mode disabled
> > for the duration of the EFI call.
Right, the lack of IDT is intentional since we disable interrupts while
making the EFI call and so far I have side-stepped (ignored) the NMI/MCE
issue.
Perf is an interesting use case. I've admittedly never used it with EFI
mixed mode, but yes, we should definitely get that working (if NMI/MCE
handling wasn't justification enough).
> > As far as I know, the only way to have continuously functional interrupt
> > handling across a long mode transition is to install an interrupt vector
> > table and hope that CPUs actually do something intelligent when
> > receiving an interrupt with LME=1, LMA=1, and PG=0. Yuck.
> >
> > Could we get away with issuing 32-bit EFI calls in compat mode, i.e.
> > with a 32-bit CPL0 CS but while still in long mode? I think that
> > delivery of an IST interrupt (which includes both NMI and MCE) will
> > correctly switch to a fully valid 64-bit state and would correctly
> > switch back when we execute IRET at the end. (Am I missing some reason
> > that switching bitness without a privilege level change doesn't work
> > well? I haven't thought of anything, other than the lack of SS/SP controls
> > on intra-ring interrupts, but that shouldn't be an issue here.)
> >
> > As an added benefit, this would considerably simplify the code.
I can't immediately think of a reason that this wouldn't work, but I've
Cc'd more x86 folks for additional insight.
I will schedule some time to look into this issue in the new year.
Thanks Andy.
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-31 18:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <5491B4A8.905@amacapital.net>
2014-12-17 16:54 ` EFI mixed mode + perf = rampant triple faults Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-31 18:37 ` Matt Fleming [this message]
[not found] ` <20141231183739.GA28946-HNK1S37rvNbeXh+fF434Mdi2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org>
2015-01-14 16:51 ` Matt Fleming
[not found] ` <20150114165151.GA3479-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org>
2015-01-14 18:27 ` Andy Lutomirski
[not found] ` <CALCETrWOxPwoL0zo0UZMk=05uAEqgY-Xovk1=JHwbVtinx3u3w-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-01-14 18:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-01-14 18:38 ` Andy Lutomirski
[not found] ` <CALCETrUEfQY-hnmNV9-PfDbEYLa7bVoRcsZc2X0V+mEAbfNH2g-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-01-14 18:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-01-14 18:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-01-15 19:41 ` Matt Fleming
[not found] ` <20150115194127.GB12079-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org>
2015-01-15 19:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
[not found] ` <54B81C2E.2090909-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2015-01-15 22:21 ` Matt Fleming
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=20141231183739.GA28946@console-pimps.org \
--to=matt@console-pimps.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox