From: Alexey Korolev <alexey.korolev@endace.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: sfd@endace.com, Kevin O'Connor <kevin@koconnor.net>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC/PATCH] Fix guest OS panic when 64bit BAR is present
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 16:20:29 +1300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F20C67D.30307@endace.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120125125131.GC22203@redhat.com>
On 26/01/12 01:51, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 06:46:03PM +1300, Alexey Korolev wrote:
>> Hi,
>> In this post
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-12/msg03171.html I've
>> mentioned about the issues when 64Bit PCI BAR is present and 32bit
>> address range is selected for it.
>> The issue affects all recent qemu releases and all
>> old and recent guest Linux kernel versions.
>>
>> We've done some investigations. Let me explain what happens.
>> Assume we have 64bit BAR with size 32MB mapped at [0xF0000000 -
>> 0xF2000000]
>>
>> When Linux guest starts it does PCI bus enumeration.
>> The OS enumerates 64BIT bars using the following procedure.
>> 1. Write all FF's to lower half of 64bit BAR
>> 2. Write address back to lower half of 64bit BAR
>> 3. Write all FF's to higher half of 64bit BAR
>> 4. Write address back to higher half of 64bit BAR
>>
>> Linux code is here:
>> http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.2.1/drivers/pci/probe.c#L149
>>
>> What does it mean for qemu?
>>
>> At step 1. qemu pci_default_write_config() recevies all FFs for lower
>> part of the 64bit BAR. Then it applies the mask and converts the value
>> to "All FF's - size + 1" (FE000000 if size is 32MB).
>> Then pci_bar_address() checks if BAR address is valid. Since it is a
>> 64bit bar it reads 0x00000000FE000000 - this address is valid. So qemu
>> updates topology and sends request to update mappings in KVM with new
>> range for the 64bit BAR FE000000 - 0xFFFFFFFF. This usually means kernel
>> panic on boot, if there is another mapping in the FE000000 - 0xFFFFFFFF
>> range, which is quite common.
>>
>>
>> The following patch fixes the issue. It affects 64bit PCI BAR's only.
>> The idea of the patch is: we introduce the states for low and high BARs
>> whose can have 3 possible values: BAR_VALID, PCIBAR64_PARTIAL_SIZE_QUERY
>> - someone has requested size of one half of the 64bit PCI BAR,
>> PCIBAR64_PARTIAL_ADDR_PROGRAM - someone has sent a request to update the
>> address of one half of the 64bit PCI BAR. The state becomes BAR_VALID
>> when both halfs are in the same state. We ignore BAR value until both
>> states become BAR_VALID
>>
>> Note: Please use the latest Seabios version (commit
>> 139d5ac037de828f89c36e39c6dd15610650cede and later), as older versions
>> didn't initialize high part of 64bit BAR.
>>
>> The patch is tested on Linux 2.6.18 - 3.1.0 and Windows 2008 Server
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Korolev <alexey.korolev@endace.com>
> Interesting. However, looking at guest code,
> I note that memory and io are disabled
> during BAR sizing unless mmio always on is set.
> pci_bar_address should return PCI_BAR_UNMAPPED
> in this case, and we should never map this BAR
> until it's enabled. What's going on?
>
>
Oh. Good point. You are right here. Linux developers
have added a protection starting 2.6.36 for lower part of PCI BAR.
So this issue affects all guest kernels before 2.6.36.
Sorry about confusion.
The code without protection is here:
http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.35.9/drivers/pci/probe.c#L162
To solve this issue for older kernel versions the submitted patch is still relevant.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-26 3:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-25 5:46 [Qemu-devel] [RFC/PATCH] Fix guest OS panic when 64bit BAR is present Alexey Korolev
2012-01-25 12:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-01-26 3:20 ` Alexey Korolev [this message]
2012-01-25 15:38 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-01-25 18:59 ` Alex Williamson
2012-01-26 3:19 ` Alexey Korolev
2012-01-26 13:51 ` Avi Kivity
2012-01-26 14:05 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-01-26 14:33 ` Avi Kivity
2012-01-26 9:14 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-01-26 13:52 ` Avi Kivity
2012-01-26 14:36 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-01-26 15:12 ` Avi Kivity
2012-01-27 4:42 ` Alexey Korolev
2012-01-31 9:40 ` Avi Kivity
2012-01-31 9:43 ` Avi Kivity
2012-02-01 5:44 ` Alexey Korolev
2012-02-01 7:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-02-02 2:22 ` Alexey Korolev
2012-01-31 10:51 ` Avi Kivity
2012-01-27 4:40 ` Alexey Korolev
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=4F20C67D.30307@endace.com \
--to=alexey.korolev@endace.com \
--cc=kevin@koconnor.net \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=sfd@endace.com \
/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).