Re: [PATCH V4] acpi/prmt: find block with specific type
From: Zhang, Rui
Date: Wed Sep 11 2024 - 02:07:56 EST
On Wed, 2024-09-11 at 12:52 +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.
s/procedue/procedure ?
> 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@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Matthew R. Ochs <mochs@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> Closes:
> https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202409071245.bkGWWtfQ-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/
I don't think you need these two lines. This applies when you address
the bug in a separate patch.
> ---
> V2:
> 1. format the changelog and add more about error handling.
> 2. replace goto
> V3: Warn if parts of handler are missed during va-pa translating.
> V4: Fix the 0day
> ---
> drivers/acpi/prmt.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> --
> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/prmt.c b/drivers/acpi/prmt.c
> index c78453c74ef5..029e8f9db53a 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/prmt.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/prmt.c
> @@ -72,15 +72,17 @@ 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;
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
> @@ -148,9 +150,18 @@ 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);
> +
> + if (!th->handler_addr || !th->static_data_buffer_addr
> || !th->acpi_param_buffer_addr)
> + pr_warn(
> + "Idx: %llu, Parts of handler(GUID:
> %pUB) are missed, handler_addr %llx, data_addr %llx, param_addr
> %llx",
> + cur_handler, th->handler_addr,
> + th->static_data_buffer_addr, th-
> >acpi_param_buffer_addr);
have you run build test for this patch?
drivers/acpi/prmt.c: In function ‘acpi_parse_prmt’:
./include/linux/kern_levels.h:5:25: warning: format ‘%llx’ expects a
matching ‘long long unsigned int’ argument [-Wformat=]
5 | #define KERN_SOH "\001" /* ASCII Start Of
Header */
| ^~~~~~
./include/linux/printk.h:437:25: note: in definition of macro
‘printk_index_wrap’
437 | _p_func(_fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);
\
| ^~~~
./include/linux/printk.h:518:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘printk’
518 | printk(KERN_WARNING pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
| ^~~~~~
./include/linux/kern_levels.h:12:25: note: in expansion of macro
‘KERN_SOH’
12 | #define KERN_WARNING KERN_SOH "4" /* warning conditions
*/
| ^~~~~~~~
./include/linux/printk.h:518:16: note: in expansion of macro
‘KERN_WARNING’
518 | printk(KERN_WARNING pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~
drivers/acpi/prmt.c:161:25: note: in expansion of macro ‘pr_warn’
161 | pr_warn(
| ^~~~~~~
-rui
> } while (++cur_handler < tm->handler_count && (handler_info =
> get_next_handler(handler_info)));
>
> return 0;
> @@ -250,8 +261,16 @@ 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;
> + return AE_OK;
> + }
> +
> + if (!handler->handler_addr || !handler-
> >static_data_buffer_addr ||
> + !handler->acpi_param_buffer_addr) {
> + buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_ERROR;
> + return AE_OK;
> + }
>
> ACPI_COPY_NAMESEG(context.signature, "PRMC");
> context.revision = 0x0;
> @@ -274,8 +293,10 @@ 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 +307,10 @@ 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 +325,6 @@ 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)