On Wed, 2024-08-21 at 13:48 +0800, Koba Ko wrote: > > On 8/21/24 12:55, Zhang, Rui wrote: > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > > > > On Wed, 2024-08-21 at 12:01 +0800, Koba Ko wrote: > > > On 8/21/24 11:20, Zhang, Rui wrote: > > > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2024-08-01 at 09:48 +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. > > > > > > > > > Too many characters in one line. > > > > https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html#the-canonical-patch-format > > > will fix this in the description. > > > > > > > > > [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. > > > > > prmt find a block with EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE for prm > > > > > context. > > > > > By using the correct memory types for runtime services, > > > > > we can ensure that the PRM handler and > > > > > its context are properly mapped in the virtual address space > > > > > during > > > > > runtime, > > > > > preventing the paging request error. > > > > some general rules to follow when writing a changelog > > > > https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-tip.html 4.2.3. > > > > Changelog > > > will decorate this. > > > > > [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> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/acpi/prmt.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > > > > ----- > > > > > ----- > > > > > -- > > > > > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/prmt.c b/drivers/acpi/prmt.c > > > > > index c78453c74ef5..e2f0bdd81013 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_err("PRM: Failed to find a block for pa: %lx type > > > > > %u\n", > > > > > pa, type); > > > > > + > > > > If it is a pr_err, why not error out? > > > > or what is the proper handling for such failures? > > > > > > Not sure if you missed this one. > > It is not clear what is the expected behavior in this case. Better > > to > > describe this in the changelog as well. > > Sorry, missed. > if get failure and return 0. > in acpi_platformrt_space_handler, it takes care to handle the null > pointers. > ``` > + if (!handler->handler_addr || > !handler->static_data_buffer_addr || > + !handler->acpi_param_buffer_addr) { > + buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_ERROR; > + goto error; > + } > ``` > will also update in the description. Yeah, but I mean pr_err() may be overkill if the driver is still functional. thanks, rui > > > > > > 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 +257,16 @@ 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; > > > > > + goto error; > > > > I think it is okay to return AE_OK directly, right? > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > rui > > > I'm also good for this. > > > I followed the convention in this block. > > > If change to "return", i will change all "goto error". > > > How do you think? > > sounds good to me. > > > > -rui > > > > > > > + } > > > > > + > > > > > + if (!handler->handler_addr || !handler- > > > > > > static_data_buffer_addr || > > > > > + !handler->acpi_param_buffer_addr) { > > > > > + buffer->prm_status = > > > > > PRM_HANDLER_ERROR; > > > > > + goto error; > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > ACPI_COPY_NAMESEG(context.signature, > > > > > "PRMC"); > > > > > context.revision = 0x0; > > > > > @@ -274,8 +289,10 @@ 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; > > > > > + goto error; > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > if (module->updatable) > > > > > module->updatable = false; > > > > > @@ -286,8 +303,10 @@ 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; > > > > > + goto error; > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > if (module->updatable) > > > > > buffer->prm_status = > > > > > UPDATE_UNLOCK_WITHOUT_LOCK; > > > > > @@ -301,10 +320,7 @@ static acpi_status > > > > > acpi_platformrt_space_handler(u32 function, > > > > > break; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > - return AE_OK; > > > > > - > > > > > -invalid_guid: > > > > > - buffer->prm_status = PRM_HANDLER_GUID_NOT_FOUND; > > > > > +error: > > > > > return AE_OK; > > > > > } > > > > >
