| Message ID | 20240901162255.1302358-1-kobak@nvidia.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [V2] acpi/prmt: find block with specific type | expand |
Hi KobaK, kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: [auto build test WARNING on rafael-pm/linux-next] [also build test WARNING on rafael-pm/bleeding-edge linus/master v6.11-rc6 next-20240830] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/KobaK/acpi-prmt-find-block-with-specific-type/20240902-002354 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git linux-next patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240901162255.1302358-1-kobak%40nvidia.com patch subject: [PATCH V2] acpi/prmt: find block with specific type config: x86_64-kexec (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240902/202409021235.QLbKiKxF-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: clang version 18.1.5 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 617a15a9eac96088ae5e9134248d8236e34b91b1) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240902/202409021235.QLbKiKxF-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202409021235.QLbKiKxF-lkp@intel.com/ All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >> drivers/acpi/prmt.c:88:66: warning: format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has type 'u64' (aka 'unsigned long long') [-Wformat] 88 | pr_warn("PRM: Failed to find a VA block for pa: %lx type %u\n", pa, type); | ~~~ ^~ | %llx include/linux/printk.h:518:37: note: expanded from macro 'pr_warn' 518 | printk(KERN_WARNING pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__) | ~~~ ^~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/printk.h:465:60: note: expanded from macro 'printk' 465 | #define printk(fmt, ...) printk_index_wrap(_printk, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__) | ~~~ ^~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/printk.h:437:19: note: expanded from macro 'printk_index_wrap' 437 | _p_func(_fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ | ~~~~ ^~~~~~~~~~~ 1 warning generated. vim +88 drivers/acpi/prmt.c 74 75 static u64 efi_pa_va_lookup(u64 pa, u32 type) 76 { 77 efi_memory_desc_t *md; 78 u64 pa_offset = pa & ~PAGE_MASK; 79 u64 page = pa & PAGE_MASK; 80 81 for_each_efi_memory_desc(md) { 82 if ((md->type == type) && 83 (md->phys_addr < pa && pa < md->phys_addr + PAGE_SIZE * md->num_pages)) { 84 return pa_offset + md->virt_addr + page - md->phys_addr; 85 } 86 } 87 > 88 pr_warn("PRM: Failed to find a VA block for pa: %lx type %u\n", pa, type); 89 90 return 0; 91 } 92
On 9/2/24 14:36, Zhang, Rui wrote: > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > On Mon, 2024-09-02 at 00:22 +0800, KobaK wrote: >> PRMT needs to find the correct type of block to >> translate the PA-VA mapping for EFI runtime services. >> >> The issue arises because the PRMT is finding a block of >> type EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY, which is not appropriate for >> runtime services as described in Section 2.2.2 (Runtime >> Services) of the UEFI Specification [1]. Since the PRM handler is >> a type of runtime service, this causes an exception >> when the PRM handler is called. >> >> [Firmware Bug]: Unable to handle paging request in EFI runtime >> service >> WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 4330 at drivers/firmware/efi/runtime- >> wrappers.c:341 >> __efi_queue_work+0x11c/0x170 >> Call trace: >> __efi_queue_work+0x11c/0x170 >> efi_call_acpi_prm_handler+0x68/0xd0 >> acpi_platformrt_space_handler+0x198/0x258 >> acpi_ev_address_space_dispatch+0x144/0x388 >> acpi_ex_access_region+0x9c/0x118 >> acpi_ex_write_serial_bus+0xc4/0x218 >> acpi_ex_write_data_to_field+0x168/0x218 >> acpi_ex_store_object_to_node+0x1a8/0x258 >> acpi_ex_store+0xec/0x330 >> acpi_ex_opcode_1A_1T_1R+0x15c/0x618 >> acpi_ds_exec_end_op+0x274/0x548 >> acpi_ps_parse_loop+0x10c/0x6b8 >> acpi_ps_parse_aml+0x140/0x3b0 >> acpi_ps_execute_method+0x12c/0x2a0 >> acpi_ns_evaluate+0x210/0x310 >> acpi_evaluate_object+0x178/0x358 >> acpi_proc_write+0x1a8/0x8a0 [acpi_call] >> proc_reg_write+0xcc/0x150 >> vfs_write+0xd8/0x380 >> ksys_write+0x70/0x120 >> __arm64_sys_write+0x24/0x48 >> invoke_syscall.constprop.0+0x80/0xf8 >> do_el0_svc+0x50/0x110 >> el0_svc+0x48/0x1d0 >> el0t_64_sync_handler+0x15c/0x178 >> el0t_64_sync+0x1a8/0x1b0 >> >> Find a block with specific type to fix this. >> prmt find a block with EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA for prm handler and >> find a block with EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE for prm context. >> If no suitable block is found, a warning message will be prompted >> but the procedue continues to manage the next prm handler. >> However, if the prm handler is actullay called without proper >> allocation, >> it would result in a failure during error handling. >> >> By using the correct memory types for runtime services, >> Ensure that the PRM handler and the context are >> properly mapped in the virtual address space during runtime, >> preventing the paging request error. >> >> [1] >> https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI_Spec_2_10_Aug29.pdf >> >> Fixes: cefc7ca46235 ("ACPI: PRM: implement OperationRegion handler >> for the PlatformRtMechanism subtype") >> Signed-off-by: KobaK <kobak@nvidia.com> >> Reviewed-by: Matthew R. Ochs <mochs@nvidia.com> >> --- >> V2: >> 1. format the changelog and add more about error handling. >> 2. replace goto >> --- >> drivers/acpi/prmt.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- >> -- >> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/prmt.c b/drivers/acpi/prmt.c >> index c78453c74ef5..281cdb53eddb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/prmt.c >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/prmt.c >> @@ -72,17 +72,21 @@ struct prm_module_info { >> struct prm_handler_info handlers[] >> __counted_by(handler_count); >> }; >> >> -static u64 efi_pa_va_lookup(u64 pa) >> +static u64 efi_pa_va_lookup(u64 pa, u32 type) >> { >> efi_memory_desc_t *md; >> u64 pa_offset = pa & ~PAGE_MASK; >> u64 page = pa & PAGE_MASK; >> >> for_each_efi_memory_desc(md) { >> - if (md->phys_addr < pa && pa < md->phys_addr + >> PAGE_SIZE * md->num_pages) >> + if ((md->type == type) && >> + (md->phys_addr < pa && pa < md->phys_addr + >> PAGE_SIZE * md->num_pages)) { >> return pa_offset + md->virt_addr + page - md- >>> phys_addr; >> + } >> } >> >> + pr_warn("PRM: Failed to find a VA block for pa: %lx type >> %u\n", pa, type); >> + >> return 0; >> } >> >> @@ -148,9 +152,12 @@ acpi_parse_prmt(union acpi_subtable_headers >> *header, const unsigned long end) >> th = &tm->handlers[cur_handler]; >> >> guid_copy(&th->guid, (guid_t *)handler_info- >>> handler_guid); >> - th->handler_addr = (void >> *)efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->handler_address); >> - th->static_data_buffer_addr = >> efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->static_data_buffer_address); >> - th->acpi_param_buffer_addr = >> efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->acpi_param_buffer_address); >> + th->handler_addr = >> + (void *)efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info- >>> handler_address, EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE); >> + th->static_data_buffer_addr = >> + efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info- >>> static_data_buffer_address, EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA); >> + th->acpi_param_buffer_addr = >> + efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info- >>> acpi_param_buffer_address, EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA); > why not remove pr_warn() in efi_pa_va_lookup(), and check for all three > addrs here with a more detailed message about which part is missing for > which module/handler? This's a good idea, I'm planning to continue the next prm handler once the failure happens. also prompt the warning message about which part is missing. the missing parts have zero address. e.g. if(!handler_addr || !static_data_buffer_addr || !acpi_param_buffer_addr) pr_warn ( "Idx: %d, Parts of handler(GUID: %pUB) are missed, handler_addr %llx, data_addr %llx, param_addr %llx", cur_handler, handler_addr, static_data_buffer_addr, acpi_param_buffer_addr); > >> } while (++cur_handler < tm->handler_count && (handler_info = >> get_next_handler(handler_info))); >> >> return 0; >> @@ -250,8 +257,18 @@ static acpi_status >> acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, >> >> handler = find_prm_handler(&buffer->handler_guid); >> module = find_prm_module(&buffer->handler_guid); >> - if (!handler || !module) >> - goto invalid_guid; >> + if (!handler || !module) { >> + buffer->prm_status = >> PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; >> + pr_err("PRM: PRM Handler GUID is not >> found\n"); > Are you sure you want to get this error message every time the address > space handler is invoked, rather than give an one time warning during > the handler probe time? > > thanks, > rui the 1st idea is good. if it's applied, I agree your comment here, too. Thanks, i will send v3. >> + return AE_OK; >> + } >> + >> + if (!handler->handler_addr || !handler- >>> static_data_buffer_addr || >> + !handler->acpi_param_buffer_addr) { >> + buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_ERROR; >> + pr_err("PRM: PRM Handler not found\n"); >> + return AE_OK; >> + } >> >> ACPI_COPY_NAMESEG(context.signature, "PRMC"); >> context.revision = 0x0; >> @@ -274,8 +291,10 @@ static acpi_status >> acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, >> case PRM_CMD_START_TRANSACTION: >> >> module = find_prm_module(&buffer->handler_guid); >> - if (!module) >> - goto invalid_guid; >> + if (!module) { >> + buffer->prm_status = >> PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; >> + return AE_OK; >> + } >> >> if (module->updatable) >> module->updatable = false; >> @@ -286,8 +305,10 @@ static acpi_status >> acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, >> case PRM_CMD_END_TRANSACTION: >> >> module = find_prm_module(&buffer->handler_guid); >> - if (!module) >> - goto invalid_guid; >> + if (!module) { >> + buffer->prm_status = >> PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; >> + return AE_OK; >> + } >> >> if (module->updatable) >> buffer->prm_status = >> UPDATE_UNLOCK_WITHOUT_LOCK; >> @@ -302,10 +323,6 @@ static acpi_status >> acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, >> } >> >> return AE_OK; >> - >> -invalid_guid: >> - buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; >> - return AE_OK; >> } >> >> void __init init_prmt(void)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/prmt.c b/drivers/acpi/prmt.c index c78453c74ef5..281cdb53eddb 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/prmt.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/prmt.c @@ -72,17 +72,21 @@ struct prm_module_info { struct prm_handler_info handlers[] __counted_by(handler_count); }; -static u64 efi_pa_va_lookup(u64 pa) +static u64 efi_pa_va_lookup(u64 pa, u32 type) { efi_memory_desc_t *md; u64 pa_offset = pa & ~PAGE_MASK; u64 page = pa & PAGE_MASK; for_each_efi_memory_desc(md) { - if (md->phys_addr < pa && pa < md->phys_addr + PAGE_SIZE * md->num_pages) + if ((md->type == type) && + (md->phys_addr < pa && pa < md->phys_addr + PAGE_SIZE * md->num_pages)) { return pa_offset + md->virt_addr + page - md->phys_addr; + } } + pr_warn("PRM: Failed to find a VA block for pa: %lx type %u\n", pa, type); + return 0; } @@ -148,9 +152,12 @@ acpi_parse_prmt(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, const unsigned long end) th = &tm->handlers[cur_handler]; guid_copy(&th->guid, (guid_t *)handler_info->handler_guid); - th->handler_addr = (void *)efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->handler_address); - th->static_data_buffer_addr = efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->static_data_buffer_address); - th->acpi_param_buffer_addr = efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->acpi_param_buffer_address); + th->handler_addr = + (void *)efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->handler_address, EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE); + th->static_data_buffer_addr = + efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->static_data_buffer_address, EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA); + th->acpi_param_buffer_addr = + efi_pa_va_lookup(handler_info->acpi_param_buffer_address, EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA); } while (++cur_handler < tm->handler_count && (handler_info = get_next_handler(handler_info))); return 0; @@ -250,8 +257,18 @@ static acpi_status acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, handler = find_prm_handler(&buffer->handler_guid); module = find_prm_module(&buffer->handler_guid); - if (!handler || !module) - goto invalid_guid; + if (!handler || !module) { + buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; + pr_err("PRM: PRM Handler GUID is not found\n"); + return AE_OK; + } + + if (!handler->handler_addr || !handler->static_data_buffer_addr || + !handler->acpi_param_buffer_addr) { + buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_ERROR; + pr_err("PRM: PRM Handler not found\n"); + return AE_OK; + } ACPI_COPY_NAMESEG(context.signature, "PRMC"); context.revision = 0x0; @@ -274,8 +291,10 @@ static acpi_status acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, case PRM_CMD_START_TRANSACTION: module = find_prm_module(&buffer->handler_guid); - if (!module) - goto invalid_guid; + if (!module) { + buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; + return AE_OK; + } if (module->updatable) module->updatable = false; @@ -286,8 +305,10 @@ static acpi_status acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, case PRM_CMD_END_TRANSACTION: module = find_prm_module(&buffer->handler_guid); - if (!module) - goto invalid_guid; + if (!module) { + buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; + return AE_OK; + } if (module->updatable) buffer->prm_status = UPDATE_UNLOCK_WITHOUT_LOCK; @@ -302,10 +323,6 @@ static acpi_status acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, } return AE_OK; - -invalid_guid: - buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; - return AE_OK; } void __init init_prmt(void)
PRMT needs to find the correct type of block to translate the PA-VA mapping for EFI runtime services. The issue arises because the PRMT is finding a block of type EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY, which is not appropriate for runtime services as described in Section 2.2.2 (Runtime Services) of the UEFI Specification [1]. Since the PRM handler is a type of runtime service, this causes an exception when the PRM handler is called. [Firmware Bug]: Unable to handle paging request in EFI runtime service WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 4330 at drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c:341 __efi_queue_work+0x11c/0x170 Call trace: __efi_queue_work+0x11c/0x170 efi_call_acpi_prm_handler+0x68/0xd0 acpi_platformrt_space_handler+0x198/0x258 acpi_ev_address_space_dispatch+0x144/0x388 acpi_ex_access_region+0x9c/0x118 acpi_ex_write_serial_bus+0xc4/0x218 acpi_ex_write_data_to_field+0x168/0x218 acpi_ex_store_object_to_node+0x1a8/0x258 acpi_ex_store+0xec/0x330 acpi_ex_opcode_1A_1T_1R+0x15c/0x618 acpi_ds_exec_end_op+0x274/0x548 acpi_ps_parse_loop+0x10c/0x6b8 acpi_ps_parse_aml+0x140/0x3b0 acpi_ps_execute_method+0x12c/0x2a0 acpi_ns_evaluate+0x210/0x310 acpi_evaluate_object+0x178/0x358 acpi_proc_write+0x1a8/0x8a0 [acpi_call] proc_reg_write+0xcc/0x150 vfs_write+0xd8/0x380 ksys_write+0x70/0x120 __arm64_sys_write+0x24/0x48 invoke_syscall.constprop.0+0x80/0xf8 do_el0_svc+0x50/0x110 el0_svc+0x48/0x1d0 el0t_64_sync_handler+0x15c/0x178 el0t_64_sync+0x1a8/0x1b0 Find a block with specific type to fix this. prmt find a block with EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA for prm handler and find a block with EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE for prm context. If no suitable block is found, a warning message will be prompted but the procedue continues to manage the next prm handler. However, if the prm handler is actullay called without proper allocation, it would result in a failure during error handling. By using the correct memory types for runtime services, Ensure that the PRM handler and the context are properly mapped in the virtual address space during runtime, preventing the paging request error. [1] https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI_Spec_2_10_Aug29.pdf Fixes: cefc7ca46235 ("ACPI: PRM: implement OperationRegion handler for the PlatformRtMechanism subtype") Signed-off-by: KobaK <kobak@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Matthew R. Ochs <mochs@nvidia.com> --- V2: 1. format the changelog and add more about error handling. 2. replace goto --- drivers/acpi/prmt.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)