From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org>
Cc: Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com>,
Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@nebula.com>,
matt.fleming@intel.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Subject: Re: [regression, bisected] x86: efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code
Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 10:35:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130528083505.GA30042@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130524074331.GL14575@console-pimps.org>
* Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org> wrote:
> What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code
> is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in
> your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines
> that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what
> makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is
> that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region,
> not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a
> second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access
> physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we
> haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.
>
> The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this
> problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice
> that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a
> firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm
> that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),
>
> status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
> EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
> EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
> EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
> &remaining_size, &var_size);
>
> that later makes GetNextVariable() jump to the physical address of the
> EFI Boot Services region. Because if not, we need to do some more
> digging.
>
> Borislav, how are your 1:1 mapping patches coming along? In theory, once
> those are merged we can gracefully workaround these kinds of issues.
Handling these gracefully without crashing boxes or expecting firmware to
be sane (which is wishful thinking) would be _SO_ preferred ...
I suspect 1:1 mapped is what Windows does - and we simply need to provide
a Windows-EFI compatible environment (which is reality), not just an
EFI-spec environment (which is a fiction).
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-28 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-22 16:27 [regression, bisected] x86: efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code Russ Anderson
2013-05-23 11:58 ` Matt Fleming
2013-05-23 20:32 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-24 7:43 ` Matt Fleming
2013-05-24 11:09 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-05-24 11:40 ` Matt Fleming
2013-05-24 16:11 ` Robin Holt
2013-05-24 17:02 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-24 21:05 ` Dave Jones
2013-05-27 4:27 ` joeyli
2013-05-27 4:32 ` joeyli
2013-05-28 2:43 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-24 20:05 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-24 20:11 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-05-24 20:49 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-28 10:50 ` Matt Fleming
2013-05-28 10:53 ` Matt Fleming
2013-05-28 8:35 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2013-05-29 21:01 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-29 22:22 ` Jiri Kosina
2013-05-29 22:46 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-29 22:53 ` Jiri Kosina
2013-05-30 2:16 ` joeyli
2013-05-30 22:17 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-30 22:21 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-05-30 22:28 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-30 22:30 ` Jiri Kosina
2013-05-31 2:17 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-31 3:28 ` joeyli
2013-05-30 22:32 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-05-31 2:54 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-31 10:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-30 22:25 ` Jiri Kosina
2013-05-31 10:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-31 11:06 ` Jiri Kosina
2013-05-31 11:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-31 11:54 ` Josh Boyer
2013-05-31 12:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-05-31 12:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-31 14:34 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-05-31 14:42 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-31 14:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-31 14:48 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-05-31 15:43 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-31 16:28 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-05-31 17:35 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-31 22:57 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-31 22:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-31 23:30 ` Jiri Kosina
2013-06-01 0:03 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-06-01 4:20 ` Russ Anderson
2013-06-01 4:41 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-06-01 11:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-06-01 14:40 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-05-30 2:38 ` joeyli
2013-05-23 22:23 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-24 7:45 ` Matt Fleming
2013-05-29 20:16 ` Russ Anderson
2013-05-31 14:41 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=20130528083505.GA30042@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
--cc=matt@console-pimps.org \
--cc=matthew.garrett@nebula.com \
--cc=rja@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).