Message ID | 20211217141348.379461-1-hdegoede@redhat.com |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Commit | 7f7b4236f2040d19df1ddaf30047128b41e78de7 |
Headers | show |
Series | [v6] x86/PCI: Ignore E820 reservations for bridge windows on newer systems | expand |
Hi All, On 12/17/21 15:13, Hans de Goede wrote: > Some BIOS-es contain a bug where they add addresses which map to system > RAM in the PCI host bridge window returned by the ACPI _CRS method, see > commit 4dc2287c1805 ("x86: avoid E820 regions when allocating address > space"). > > To work around this bug Linux excludes E820 reserved addresses when > allocating addresses from the PCI host bridge window since 2010. > > Recently (2019) some systems have shown-up with E820 reservations which > cover the entire _CRS returned PCI bridge memory window, causing all > attempts to assign memory to PCI BARs which have not been setup by the > BIOS to fail. For example here are the relevant dmesg bits from a > Lenovo IdeaPad 3 15IIL 81WE: > > [mem 0x000000004bc50000-0x00000000cfffffff] reserved > pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0x65400000-0xbfffffff window] > > The ACPI specifications appear to allow this new behavior: > > The relationship between E820 and ACPI _CRS is not really very clear. > ACPI v6.3, sec 15, table 15-374, says AddressRangeReserved means: > > This range of addresses is in use or reserved by the system and is > not to be included in the allocatable memory pool of the operating > system's memory manager. > > and it may be used when: > > The address range is in use by a memory-mapped system device. > > Furthermore, sec 15.2 says: > > Address ranges defined for baseboard memory-mapped I/O devices, such > as APICs, are returned as reserved. > > A PCI host bridge qualifies as a baseboard memory-mapped I/O device, > and its apertures are in use and certainly should not be included in > the general allocatable pool, so the fact that some BIOS-es reports > the PCI aperture as "reserved" in E820 doesn't seem like a BIOS bug. > > So it seems that the excluding of E820 reserved addresses is a mistake. > > Ideally Linux would fully stop excluding E820 reserved addresses, > but then the old systems this was added for will regress. > Instead keep the old behavior for old systems, while ignoring > the E820 reservations for any systems from now on. > > Old systems are defined here as BIOS year < 2018, this was chosen to make > sure that E820 reservations will not be used on the currently affected > systems, while at the same time also taking into account that the systems > for which the E820 checking was originally added may have received BIOS > updates for quite a while (esp. CVE related ones), giving them a more > recent BIOS year then 2010. > > BugLink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206459 > BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1868899 > BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1871793 > BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1878279 > BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1931715 > BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1932069 > BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1921649 > Cc: Benoit Grégoire <benoitg@coeus.ca> > Cc: Hui Wang <hui.wang@canonical.com> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com> > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> > --- > Changes in v6: > - Remove the possibility to change the behavior from the commandline > because of worries that users may use this to paper over other problems ping ? Regards, Hans > Changes in v5: > - Drop mention of Windows behavior from the commit msg, replace with a > reference to the specs > - Improve documentation in Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt > - Reword the big comment added, use "PCI host bridge window" in it and drop > all refences to Windows > > Changes in v4: > - Rewrap the big comment block to fit in 80 columns > - Add Rafael's Acked-by > - Add Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > Changes in v3: > - Commit msg tweaks (drop dmesg timestamps, typo fix) > - Use "defined(CONFIG_...)" instead of "defined CONFIG_..." > - Add Mika's Reviewed-by > > Changes in v2: > - Replace the per model DMI quirk approach with disabling E820 reservations > checking for all systems with a BIOS year >= 2018 > - Add documentation for the new kernel-parameters to > Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt > --- > Other patches trying to address the same issue: > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210624095324.34906-1-hui.wang@canonical.com > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200617164734.84845-1-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com > V1 patch: > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211005150956.303707-1-hdegoede@redhat.com > --- > arch/x86/kernel/resource.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/resource.c b/arch/x86/kernel/resource.c > index 9b9fb7882c20..9ae64f9af956 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/resource.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/resource.c > @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +#include <linux/dmi.h> > #include <linux/ioport.h> > #include <asm/e820/api.h> > > @@ -23,11 +24,31 @@ static void resource_clip(struct resource *res, resource_size_t start, > res->start = end + 1; > } > > +/* > + * Some BIOS-es contain a bug where they add addresses which map to > + * system RAM in the PCI host bridge window returned by the ACPI _CRS > + * method, see commit 4dc2287c1805 ("x86: avoid E820 regions when > + * allocating address space"). To avoid this Linux by default excludes > + * E820 reservations when allocating addresses since 2010. > + * In 2019 some systems have shown-up with E820 reservations which cover > + * the entire _CRS returned PCI host bridge window, causing all attempts > + * to assign memory to PCI BARs to fail if Linux uses E820 reservations. > + * > + * Ideally Linux would fully stop using E820 reservations, but then > + * the old systems this was added for will regress. > + * Instead keep the old behavior for old systems, while ignoring the > + * E820 reservations for any systems from now on. > + */ > static void remove_e820_regions(struct resource *avail) > { > - int i; > + int i, year = dmi_get_bios_year(); > struct e820_entry *entry; > > + if (year >= 2018) > + return; > + > + pr_info_once("PCI: Removing E820 reservations from host bridge windows\n"); > + > for (i = 0; i < e820_table->nr_entries; i++) { > entry = &e820_table->entries[i]; > >
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/resource.c b/arch/x86/kernel/resource.c index 9b9fb7882c20..9ae64f9af956 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/resource.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/resource.c @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 +#include <linux/dmi.h> #include <linux/ioport.h> #include <asm/e820/api.h> @@ -23,11 +24,31 @@ static void resource_clip(struct resource *res, resource_size_t start, res->start = end + 1; } +/* + * Some BIOS-es contain a bug where they add addresses which map to + * system RAM in the PCI host bridge window returned by the ACPI _CRS + * method, see commit 4dc2287c1805 ("x86: avoid E820 regions when + * allocating address space"). To avoid this Linux by default excludes + * E820 reservations when allocating addresses since 2010. + * In 2019 some systems have shown-up with E820 reservations which cover + * the entire _CRS returned PCI host bridge window, causing all attempts + * to assign memory to PCI BARs to fail if Linux uses E820 reservations. + * + * Ideally Linux would fully stop using E820 reservations, but then + * the old systems this was added for will regress. + * Instead keep the old behavior for old systems, while ignoring the + * E820 reservations for any systems from now on. + */ static void remove_e820_regions(struct resource *avail) { - int i; + int i, year = dmi_get_bios_year(); struct e820_entry *entry; + if (year >= 2018) + return; + + pr_info_once("PCI: Removing E820 reservations from host bridge windows\n"); + for (i = 0; i < e820_table->nr_entries; i++) { entry = &e820_table->entries[i];