mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	Xunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2][RFC] x86/boot/e820: Introduce e820_table_ori to represent the real original e820 layout
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 12:13:56 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170623041356.GA28209@yu-desktop-1.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170622094030.7ge2g2wsvpc6lx5r@gmail.com>

Hi Ingo,
On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:40:30AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > Currently we try to have e820_table_firmware to represent the
> > original firmware memory layout passed to us by the bootloader,
> > however it is not the case, the e820_table_firmware might still
> > be modified by linux:
> > 1. During bootup, the efi boot stub might allocate memory via
> >    efi service for the PCI device information structure, then
> >    later e820_reserve_setup_data() reserved these dynamically
> >    allocated structures(AKA, setup_data) in e820_table_firmware
> >    accordingly.
> > 2. The kexec might also modify the e820_table_firmware.
> 
> Hm, so why does the EFI code modify e280_table_firmware - why doesn't
> it modify e820_table?
> 
Both the e820_table and e820_table_firmware will be updated in
e820__reserve_setup_data():
Changing the PCI device information structures from E820_TYPE_RAM
to E820_TYPE_RESERVED_KERN.
> I.e. what is the point of having 3 different versions of the
> memory layout table?
My original thought was that, we should not record the modification
from the efi boot stub into the e820_tabel_firmware and we are done.
But after checking the code, I realized that if we do so the
kexec might have potiential problem.

The e820_table_firmware was introduced mainly for kexec and
was used to pass the original memory layout to the second
kernel:

   commit 5dfcf14d5b28174f94cbe9b4fb35d415db61c64a
   Author: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
   Date:   Fri Jun 27 13:12:55 2008 +0200

       x86: use FIRMWARE_MEMMAP on x86/E820

Besides, the second kernel will not re-enter the efi boot stub
code and it will reuse the PCI device information structure created
by the first kernel, which is stored in the E820_TYPE_RESERVED_KERN
region. So these PCI device information structures will not be
modified by the second kernel, as kexec will only pass the E820_TYPE_RAM
to the second kernel, thus the latter could leverage ioremap to access
the PCI information.

So the problem is, if we do not record the PCI information in
the e820_table_firmware, the PCI information will be kept as
type E820_TYPE_RAM, and all the E820_TYPE_RAM type regions will
be passed to the second kernel and might be allocated for ordinary
use in the second kernel, as a result the second kernel might not
get valid PCI information(might be overwritten by others). So
currently we try to introduce a new e820_table_ori to represent
the original one provided by the BIOS(mainly for hibernation
memory layout md5 checking).

Thanks,
	Yu
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-23  4:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-17  5:21 [PATCH 0/2][RFC] Introduce e820_table_ori to fix the memory inconsistent problem during hibernation Chen Yu
2017-06-17  5:22 ` [PATCH 1/2][RFC] x86/boot/e820: Introduce e820_table_ori to represent the real original e820 layout Chen Yu
2017-06-22  9:40   ` Ingo Molnar
2017-06-23  4:13     ` Chen Yu [this message]
2017-06-23  8:42       ` Ingo Molnar
2017-07-02 17:01         ` Chen Yu
2017-06-17  5:23 ` [PATCH 2/2][RFC] PM / hibernate: Utilize the original e820 map for consistent check Chen Yu

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=20170623041356.GA28209@yu-desktop-1.sh.intel.com \
    --to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xlpang@redhat.com \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®