Skip to contentSkip to conversation

x86: efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code

regression, bisected Russ Anderson 14 participants 59 messages May 22, 2013 – Jun 1, 2013

Subsystems (2)
lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

Linux crashes on boot on SGI UV systems. git bisect tracked it down to commit cc5a080c5d40c36089bb08a8a16fa3fc7047fe0f. Undoing that patch fixes the problem.

http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=cc5a080c5d40c36089bb08a8a16fa3fc7047fe0f

-----------------------------------------------------------
linux$ git bisect bad cc5a080c5d40c36089bb08a8a16fa3fc7047fe0f is first bad commit commit cc5a080c5d40c36089bb08a8a16fa3fc7047fe0f

Author: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett-05XSO3Yj/[email protected]>
Date:   Mon Apr 15 13:09:46 2013 -0700

efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code

EFI variables can be flagged as being accessible only within boot services. This makes it awkward for us to figure out how much space they use at runtime. In theory we could figure this out by simply comparing the results from QueryVariableInfo() to the space used by all of our variables, but that fails if the platform doesn't garbage collect on every boot. Thankfully, calling QueryVariableInfo() while still inside boot services gives a more reliable answer. This patch passes that information from the EFI boot stub up to the efi platform code.

:040000 040000 eaaca954c158017931b383d8a7799f0372118fa4 5a2816a34b5393ca1ad49a9ce240e2e5caee3aca M arch
-----------------------------------------------------------

The failing output:
-----------------------------------------------------------

[    6.038007] Intel P-state driver initializing.
[    6.043006] Intel pstate controlling: cpu 0
[    6.047700] Intel pstate controlling: cpu 1
[    6.052456] cpuidle: using governor ladder
[    6.057085] cpuidle: using governor menu
[    6.062157] EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
[    6.067731] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
[    6.075519] IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f
[    6.081363] PGD 0
[    6.083616] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP
[    6.087240] Modules linked in:
[    6.090656] CPU 1
[    6.092706] Pid: 1, comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.9.0-0.55.el7.x86_64 #1 SGI UV2000/ROMLEY
[    6.102129] RIP: 0010:[<ffff88007dbf2140>]  [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f
[    6.110681] RSP: 0000:ffff880815913990  EFLAGS: 00010202
[    6.116603] RAX: 000000007ca95ad0 RBX: 000000000000006a RCX: 0000000090000002
[    6.124562] RDX: 0000000003050007 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffff88007dbf6ea8
[    6.132520] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
[    6.140478] R10: 0000000000003638 R11: ffff880815913b8e R12: 0000000003050007
[    6.148436] R13: 0000000090000002 R14: ffff880815913e00 R15: 0000000000000000
[    6.156394] FS:  0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8817bec00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[    6.165418] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[    6.171826] CR2: 000000007ca95b10 CR3: 00000000018e6000 CR4: 00000000000407e0
[    6.179785] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[    6.187743] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[    6.195702] Process swapper/0 (pid: 1, threadinfo ffff880815912000, task ffff880815928000)
[    6.204919] Stack:
[    6.207160]  00000000ffffffff 0000000000000010 0000000000000041 0000000000000040
[    6.215456]  ffffea005e447dc0 0000000000000001 002212d000000000 0000000000000246
[    6.223752]  ffff8817befd4d80 0000000000000002 0000000000000000 00000000002012d0
[    6.232048] Call Trace:
[    6.234799]  [<ffffffff8113c647>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x157/0xa00
[    6.242096]  [<ffffffff812f02df>] ? idr_get_empty_slot+0x16f/0x3c0
[    6.248997]  [<ffffffff812f7972>] ? put_dec+0x72/0x90
[    6.254633]  [<ffffffff812f076c>] ? ida_get_new_above+0x6c/0x290
[    6.261340]  [<ffffffff8120d0b5>] ? sysfs_link_sibling+0xb5/0xe0
[    6.268040]  [<ffffffff8120d7b1>] ? __sysfs_add_one+0x71/0x110
[    6.274545]  [<ffffffff8120d9d3>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x33/0xc0
[    6.281245]  [<ffffffff8120dadd>] ? create_dir+0x7d/0xd0
[    6.287171]  [<ffffffff8120de72>] ? sysfs_create_dir+0x92/0xf0
[    6.293690]  [<ffffffff81058a23>] ? efi_call3+0x43/0x80
[    6.299517]  [<ffffffff8105832a>] ? virt_efi_get_next_variable+0x3a/0x1a0
[    6.307095]  [<ffffffff814b27e3>] ? register_efivars+0xd3/0x530
[    6.313710]  [<ffffffff81a4d042>] ? dmi_sysfs_register_handle+0x1c7/0x1c7
[    6.321280]  [<ffffffff81a4d0f5>] ? efivars_init+0xb3/0xff
[    6.327405]  [<ffffffff8100210a>] ? do_one_initcall+0x10a/0x160
[    6.334026]  [<ffffffff81a0e064>] ? kernel_init_freeable+0x181/0x207
[    6.341115]  [<ffffffff81a0d887>] ? do_early_param+0x88/0x88
[    6.347445]  [<ffffffff815e0340>] ? rest_init+0x80/0x80
[    6.353274]  [<ffffffff815e034e>] ? kernel_init+0xe/0x180
[    6.359307]  [<ffffffff8160acac>] ? ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
[    6.365522]  [<ffffffff815e0340>] ? rest_init+0x80/0x80
[    6.371347] Code: 8b d8 e8 e4 fa ff ff 84 c0 75 0f 48 8b 15 61 58 00 00 48 8b 4c 24 30 ff 52 48 48 8b c3 eb 58 48 8b 05 4d 58 00 00 48 85 c0 74 42 <48> 83 78 40 00 74 3b 48 83 78 48 00 74 34 48 8d 53 14 4c 8d 44
[    6.393044] RIP  [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f
[    6.398978]  RSP <ffff880815913990>
[    6.406605] ---[ end trace 18f487bf56d8bf90 ]---
[    6.411785] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! exitcode=0x00000009

-----------------------------------------------------------

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#1 lore raw
Quoted 3 lines · Russ Anderson
[    6.062157] EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
[    6.067731] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
[    6.075519] IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f

This is a bit of a head scratcher. Could you paste the EFI memmap entries in your dmesg for the regions that cover 0x7ca95b10 and 0x7dbf2140? My guess would be that they're EFI runtime code regions, which would at least explain why we seem to be executing code in the direct mapping region (0xffff8800xxxxxxxx).

Are you booting via the EFI boot stub?

Signature · 1 line
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
#2 lore raw
Quoted 10 lines · Matt Fleming
Quoted 3 lines · Russ Anderson
[    6.062157] EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
[    6.067731] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
[    6.075519] IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f

This is a bit of a head scratcher. Could you paste the EFI memmap entries in your dmesg for the regions that cover 0x7ca95b10 and 0x7dbf2140? My guess would be that they're EFI runtime code regions, which would at least explain why we seem to be executing code in the direct mapping region (0xffff8800xxxxxxxx).

Yes. The full e820 and EFI memmap are below.

Quoted 1 line

Are you booting via the EFI boot stub?

grub2.

FWIW, the EFI related config settings.

gulag1$ grep _EFI .config
CONFIG_EFI_PARTITION=y
CONFIG_EFI=y
CONFIG_EFI_STUB=y
CONFIG_FB_EFI=y
CONFIG_EFI_VARS=y
CONFIG_EFI_VARS_PSTORE=y
CONFIG_EFI_VARS_PSTORE_DEFAULT_DISABLE=y
# CONFIG_EFIVAR_FS is not set

----------------------------------------------------------------------

   57.923378 (    0.023626)| [    0.000000] e820: BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
   57.927705 (    0.004327)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000007efff] usable
   57.987450 (    0.059745)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000007f000-0x000000000007ffff] reserved
   57.987563 (    0.000113)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000080000-0x000000000009ffff] usable
   57.987647 (    0.000084)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000007ca9bfff] usable
   57.987734 (    0.000087)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000007ca9c000-0x000000007ca9cfff] reserved
   57.987827 (    0.000093)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000007ca9d000-0x000000007caaffff] usable
   57.987914 (    0.000087)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000007cab0000-0x000000007cceffff] reserved
   57.988002 (    0.000088)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000007ccf0000-0x000000007d9fefff] usable
   58.003483 (    0.015481)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000007d9ff000-0x000000007dcfefff] reserved
   58.003590 (    0.000107)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000007dcff000-0x000000007eefefff] ACPI NVS
   58.007785 (    0.004195)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000007eeff000-0x000000007efe9fff] ACPI data
   58.015532 (    0.007747)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000007efea000-0x000000007effffff] usable
   58.023658 (    0.008126)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000080000000-0x000000008fffffff] reserved
   58.027770 (    0.004112)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000f8000000-0x00000000fdffffff] reserved
   58.035511 (    0.007741)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fed1c000-0x00000000fed1ffff] reserved
   58.043636 (    0.008125)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000100000000-0x000000083fffffff] usable
   58.051382 (    0.007746)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000001000000000-0x00000017beffffff] usable
   58.059752 (    0.008370)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000ff00000000-0x000000ff03dfffff] reserved
   58.067496 (    0.007744)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000ff03f00000-0x000000ff03ffffff] reserved
   58.075619 (    0.008123)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000ff07f00000-0x000000ff07ffffff] reserved
   58.083368 (    0.007749)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000ff40000000-0x000000ff42ffffff] reserved
   58.091738 (    0.008370)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000ff44000000-0x000000ff46ffffff] reserved
   58.099485 (    0.007747)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000ff48000000-0x000000ff4affffff] reserved
   58.107609 (    0.008124)| [    0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000ff4c000000-0x000000ff4effffff] reserved
   58.115358 (    0.007749)| [    0.000000] e820: update [mem 0x693c5018-0x693cd057] usable ==> usable
   58.123721 (    0.008363)| [    0.000000] extended physical RAM map:
   58.127414 (    0.003693)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000007efff] usable
   58.135786 (    0.008372)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000000007f000-0x000000000007ffff] reserved
   58.143544 (    0.007758)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x0000000000080000-0x000000000009ffff] usable
   58.151681 (    0.008137)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x00000000693c5017] usable
   58.159436 (    0.007755)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x00000000693c5018-0x00000000693cd057] usable
   58.167810 (    0.008374)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x00000000693cd058-0x000000007ca9bfff] usable
   58.175565 (    0.007755)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000007ca9c000-0x000000007ca9cfff] reserved
   58.183704 (    0.008139)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000007ca9d000-0x000000007caaffff] usable
   58.195472 (    0.011768)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000007cab0000-0x000000007cceffff] reserved
   58.203607 (    0.008135)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000007ccf0000-0x000000007d9fefff] usable
   58.211363 (    0.007756)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000007d9ff000-0x000000007dcfefff] reserved
   58.219746 (    0.008383)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000007dcff000-0x000000007eefefff] ACPI NVS
   58.227501 (    0.007755)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000007eeff000-0x000000007efe9fff] ACPI data
   58.235636 (    0.008135)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000007efea000-0x000000007effffff] usable
   58.243393 (    0.007757)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x0000000080000000-0x000000008fffffff] reserved
   58.255414 (    0.012021)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x00000000f8000000-0x00000000fdffffff] reserved
   58.263360 (    0.007946)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x00000000fed1c000-0x00000000fed1ffff] reserved
   58.271798 (    0.008438)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x0000000100000000-0x000000083fffffff] usable
   58.279745 (    0.007947)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x0000001000000000-0x00000017beffffff] usable
   58.287506 (    0.007761)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000ff00000000-0x000000ff03dfffff] reserved
   58.295634 (    0.008128)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000ff03f00000-0x000000ff03ffffff] reserved
   58.303393 (    0.007759)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000ff07f00000-0x000000ff07ffffff] reserved
   58.315415 (    0.012022)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000ff40000000-0x000000ff42ffffff] reserved
   58.323792 (    0.008377)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000ff44000000-0x000000ff46ffffff] reserved
   58.331548 (    0.007756)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000ff48000000-0x000000ff4affffff] reserved
   58.339687 (    0.008139)| [    0.000000] reserve setup_data: [mem 0x000000ff4c000000-0x000000ff4effffff] reserved
   58.347445 (    0.007758)| [    0.000000] NX (Execute Disable) protection: active
   58.355780 (    0.008335)| [    0.000000] efi: EFI v2.30 by EDK II
   58.359602 (    0.003822)| [    0.000000] efi:  ACPI=0x7efe9000  ACPI 2.0=0x7efe9014  SMBIOS=0x7dcfb000  UVsystab=0x7dab7000
   58.367374 (    0.007772)| [    0.000000] efi: mem00: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000000000000-0x0000000000001000) (0MB)
   58.375767 (    0.008393)| [    0.000000] efi: mem01: type=2, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000000001000-0x0000000000004000) (0MB)
   58.387792 (    0.012025)| [    0.000000] efi: mem02: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000000004000-0x000000000005f000) (0MB)
   58.395560 (    0.007768)| [    0.000000] efi: mem03: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000000005f000-0x0000000000060000) (0MB)
   58.407723 (    0.012163)| [    0.000000] efi: mem04: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000000060000-0x000000000007f000) (0MB)
   58.415490 (    0.007767)| [    0.000000] efi: mem05: type=0, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000000007f000-0x0000000000080000) (0MB)
   58.424635 (    0.009145)| [    0.000000] efi: mem06: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000000080000-0x00000000000a0000) (0MB)
   58.435668 (    0.011033)| [    0.000000] efi: mem07: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000000100000-0x0000000000c00000) (11MB)
   58.443437 (    0.007769)| [    0.000000] efi: mem08: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000000c00000-0x0000000001000000) (4MB)
   58.451822 (    0.008385)| [    0.000000] efi: mem09: type=2, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000001000000-0x0000000001fab000) (15MB)
   58.463366 (    0.011544)| [    0.000000] efi: mem10: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000001fab000-0x000000003ebb0000) (972MB)
   58.471761 (    0.008395)| [    0.000000] efi: mem11: type=2, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000003ebb0000-0x0000000040000000) (20MB)
   58.484788 (    0.013027)| [    0.000000] efi: mem12: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000040000000-0x000000004eeb1000) (238MB)
   58.494746 (    0.009958)| [    0.000000] efi: mem13: type=2, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000004eeb1000-0x0000000069231000) (419MB)
   58.513531 (    0.018785)| [    0.000000] efi: mem14: type=1, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069231000-0x00000000692ff000) (0MB)
   58.525416 (    0.011885)| [    0.000000] efi: mem15: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000692ff000-0x00000000693c5000) (0MB)
   58.536698 (    0.011282)| [    0.000000] efi: mem16: type=2, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000693c5000-0x00000000693ce000) (0MB)
   58.548787 (    0.012089)| [    0.000000] efi: mem17: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000693ce000-0x000000006941a000) (0MB)
   58.548922 (    0.000135)| [    0.000000] efi: mem18: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006941a000-0x000000006941c000) (0MB)
   58.560687 (    0.011765)| [    0.000000] efi: mem19: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006941c000-0x0000000069421000) (0MB)
   58.572589 (    0.011902)| [    0.000000] efi: mem20: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069421000-0x0000000069423000) (0MB)
   58.575380 (    0.002791)| [    0.000000] efi: mem21: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069423000-0x0000000069424000) (0MB)
   58.579662 (    0.004282)| [    0.000000] efi: mem22: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069424000-0x0000000069426000) (0MB)
   58.587433 (    0.007771)| [    0.000000] efi: mem23: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069426000-0x000000006944e000) (0MB)
   58.595816 (    0.008383)| [    0.000000] efi: mem24: type=2, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006944e000-0x0000000069453000) (0MB)
   58.607358 (    0.011542)| [    0.000000] efi: mem25: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069453000-0x0000000069457000) (0MB)
   58.615751 (    0.008393)| [    0.000000] efi: mem26: type=2, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069457000-0x0000000069466000) (0MB)
   58.623515 (    0.007764)| [    0.000000] efi: mem27: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069466000-0x0000000069523000) (0MB)
   58.635545 (    0.012030)| [    0.000000] efi: mem28: type=1, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069523000-0x00000000695e0000) (0MB)
   58.643693 (    0.008148)| [    0.000000] efi: mem29: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000695e0000-0x00000000695f0000) (0MB)
   58.655475 (    0.011782)| [    0.000000] efi: mem30: type=2, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000695f0000-0x00000000695f7000) (0MB)
   58.663619 (    0.008144)| [    0.000000] efi: mem31: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000695f7000-0x00000000695fd000) (0MB)
   58.671389 (    0.007770)| [    0.000000] efi: mem32: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000695fd000-0x0000000069600000) (0MB)
   58.683421 (    0.012032)| [    0.000000] efi: mem33: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069600000-0x0000000069603000) (0MB)
   58.691807 (    0.008386)| [    0.000000] efi: mem34: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069603000-0x0000000069617000) (0MB)
   58.703346 (    0.011539)| [    0.000000] efi: mem35: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069617000-0x0000000069619000) (0MB)
   58.711738 (    0.008392)| [    0.000000] efi: mem36: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000069619000-0x000000006961f000) (0MB)
   58.719736 (    0.007998)| [    0.000000] efi: mem37: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006961f000-0x000000006afdc000) (25MB)
   58.731784 (    0.012048)| [    0.000000] efi: mem38: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006afdc000-0x000000006b045000) (0MB)
   58.739553 (    0.007769)| [    0.000000] efi: mem39: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b045000-0x000000006b18d000) (1MB)
   58.747702 (    0.008149)| [    0.000000] efi: mem40: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b18d000-0x000000006b190000) (0MB)
   58.759485 (    0.011783)| [    0.000000] efi: mem41: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b190000-0x000000006b1ae000) (0MB)
   58.767629 (    0.008144)| [    0.000000] efi: mem42: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b1ae000-0x000000006b1df000) (0MB)
   58.779661 (    0.012032)| [    0.000000] efi: mem43: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b1df000-0x000000006b20c000) (0MB)
   58.786817 (    0.007156)| [    0.000000] efi: mem44: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b20c000-0x000000006b22c000) (0MB)
   58.795757 (    0.008940)| [    0.000000] efi: mem45: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b22c000-0x000000006b22f000) (0MB)
   58.807786 (    0.012029)| [    0.000000] efi: mem46: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b22f000-0x000000006b232000) (0MB)
   58.815554 (    0.007768)| [    0.000000] efi: mem47: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b232000-0x000000006b237000) (0MB)
   58.823704 (    0.008150)| [    0.000000] efi: mem48: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b237000-0x000000006b242000) (0MB)
   58.835485 (    0.011781)| [    0.000000] efi: mem49: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b242000-0x000000006b245000) (0MB)
   58.843628 (    0.008143)| [    0.000000] efi: mem50: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b245000-0x000000006b247000) (0MB)
   58.858639 (    0.015011)| [    0.000000] efi: mem51: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b247000-0x000000006b24a000) (0MB)
   58.863431 (    0.004792)| [    0.000000] efi: mem52: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b24a000-0x000000006b25f000) (0MB)
   58.872817 (    0.009386)| [    0.000000] efi: mem53: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b25f000-0x000000006b263000) (0MB)
   58.883357 (    0.010540)| [    0.000000] efi: mem54: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b263000-0x000000006b268000) (0MB)
   58.891749 (    0.008392)| [    0.000000] efi: mem55: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b268000-0x000000006b28b000) (0MB)
   58.900516 (    0.008767)| [    0.000000] efi: mem56: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b28b000-0x000000006b292000) (0MB)
   58.911565 (    0.011049)| [    0.000000] efi: mem57: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b292000-0x000000006b293000) (0MB)
   58.919706 (    0.008141)| [    0.000000] efi: mem58: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b293000-0x000000006b2af000) (0MB)
   58.932482 (    0.012776)| [    0.000000] efi: mem59: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b2af000-0x000000006b2b0000) (0MB)
   58.939601 (    0.007119)| [    0.000000] efi: mem60: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b2b0000-0x000000006b2b5000) (0MB)
   58.947387 (    0.007786)| [    0.000000] efi: mem61: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b2b5000-0x000000006b2b7000) (0MB)
   58.959421 (    0.012034)| [    0.000000] efi: mem62: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b2b7000-0x000000006b2e6000) (0MB)
   58.967806 (    0.008385)| [    0.000000] efi: mem63: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b2e6000-0x000000006b2e8000) (0MB)
   58.975575 (    0.007769)| [    0.000000] efi: mem64: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b2e8000-0x000000006b2ee000) (0MB)
   58.987737 (    0.012162)| [    0.000000] efi: mem65: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b2ee000-0x000000006b2f0000) (0MB)
   58.995506 (    0.007769)| [    0.000000] efi: mem66: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b2f0000-0x000000006b304000) (0MB)
   59.007534 (    0.012028)| [    0.000000] efi: mem67: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b304000-0x000000006b306000) (0MB)
   59.015684 (    0.008150)| [    0.000000] efi: mem68: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b306000-0x000000006b30c000) (0MB)
   59.023451 (    0.007767)| [    0.000000] efi: mem69: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b30c000-0x000000006b30d000) (0MB)
   59.038608 (    0.015157)| [    0.000000] efi: mem70: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b30d000-0x000000006b310000) (0MB)
   59.043807 (    0.005199)| [    0.000000] efi: mem71: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b310000-0x000000006b311000) (0MB)
   59.055345 (    0.011538)| [    0.000000] efi: mem72: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b311000-0x000000006b31a000) (0MB)
   59.063738 (    0.008393)| [    0.000000] efi: mem73: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b31a000-0x000000006b31c000) (0MB)
   59.071507 (    0.007769)| [    0.000000] efi: mem74: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b31c000-0x000000006b333000) (0MB)
   59.097647 (    0.026140)| [    0.000000] efi: mem75: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b333000-0x000000006b337000) (0MB)
   59.108554 (    0.010907)| [    0.000000] efi: mem76: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b337000-0x000000006b345000) (0MB)
   59.108685 (    0.000131)| [    0.000000] efi: mem77: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b345000-0x000000006b348000) (0MB)
   59.120455 (    0.011770)| [    0.000000] efi: mem78: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b348000-0x000000006b3bc000) (0MB)
   59.132549 (    0.012094)| [    0.000000] efi: mem79: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3bc000-0x000000006b3c6000) (0MB)
   59.144828 (    0.012279)| [    0.000000] efi: mem80: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3c6000-0x000000006b3cd000) (0MB)
   59.147614 (    0.002786)| [    0.000000] efi: mem81: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3cd000-0x000000006b3ce000) (0MB)
   59.147747 (    0.000133)| [    0.000000] efi: mem82: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3ce000-0x000000006b3d9000) (0MB)
   59.159667 (    0.011920)| [    0.000000] efi: mem83: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3d9000-0x000000006b3da000) (0MB)
   59.167436 (    0.007769)| [    0.000000] efi: mem84: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3da000-0x000000006b3e1000) (0MB)
   59.185822 (    0.018386)| [    0.000000] efi: mem85: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3e1000-0x000000006b3e2000) (0MB)
   59.187424 (    0.001602)| [    0.000000] efi: mem86: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3e2000-0x000000006b3f4000) (0MB)
   59.196755 (    0.009331)| [    0.000000] efi: mem87: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3f4000-0x000000006b3f5000) (0MB)
   59.207349 (    0.010594)| [    0.000000] efi: mem88: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b3f5000-0x000000006b408000) (0MB)
   59.215740 (    0.008391)| [    0.000000] efi: mem89: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b408000-0x000000006b40c000) (0MB)
   59.223509 (    0.007769)| [    0.000000] efi: mem90: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b40c000-0x000000006b40e000) (0MB)
   59.235537 (    0.012028)| [    0.000000] efi: mem91: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b40e000-0x000000006b411000) (0MB)
   59.243686 (    0.008149)| [    0.000000] efi: mem92: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b411000-0x000000006b4cf000) (0MB)
   59.251454 (    0.007768)| [    0.000000] efi: mem93: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b4cf000-0x000000006b4d8000) (0MB)
   59.263486 (    0.012032)| [    0.000000] efi: mem94: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b4d8000-0x000000006b526000) (0MB)
   59.272628 (    0.009142)| [    0.000000] efi: mem95: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b526000-0x000000006b52c000) (0MB)
   59.283663 (    0.011035)| [    0.000000] efi: mem96: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b52c000-0x000000006b52d000) (0MB)
   59.291431 (    0.007768)| [    0.000000] efi: mem97: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b52d000-0x000000006b531000) (0MB)
   59.307560 (    0.016129)| [    0.000000] efi: mem98: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b531000-0x000000006b53c000) (0MB)
   59.311357 (    0.003797)| [    0.000000] efi: mem99: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b53c000-0x000000006b53f000) (0MB)
   59.319479 (    0.008122)| [    0.000000] efi: mem100: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b53f000-0x000000006b56e000) (0MB)
   59.331718 (    0.012239)| [    0.000000] efi: mem101: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b56e000-0x000000006b56f000) (0MB)
   59.339489 (    0.007771)| [    0.000000] efi: mem102: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b56f000-0x000000006b578000) (0MB)
   59.347632 (    0.008143)| [    0.000000] efi: mem103: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b578000-0x000000006b57b000) (0MB)
   59.359670 (    0.012038)| [    0.000000] efi: mem104: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b57b000-0x000000006b590000) (0MB)
   59.367439 (    0.007769)| [    0.000000] efi: mem105: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b590000-0x000000006b594000) (0MB)
   59.379593 (    0.012154)| [    0.000000] efi: mem106: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b594000-0x000000006b5a5000) (0MB)
   59.387368 (    0.007775)| [    0.000000] efi: mem107: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b5a5000-0x000000006b5b2000) (0MB)
   59.395761 (    0.008393)| [    0.000000] efi: mem108: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b5b2000-0x000000006b5b7000) (0MB)
   59.407788 (    0.012027)| [    0.000000] efi: mem109: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b5b7000-0x000000006b5b8000) (0MB)
   59.415558 (    0.007770)| [    0.000000] efi: mem110: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b5b8000-0x000000006b5ba000) (0MB)
   59.427719 (    0.012161)| [    0.000000] efi: mem111: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b5ba000-0x000000006b5bb000) (0MB)
   59.435491 (    0.007772)| [    0.000000] efi: mem112: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b5bb000-0x000000006b5d8000) (0MB)
   59.443634 (    0.008143)| [    0.000000] efi: mem113: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b5d8000-0x000000006b9d8000) (4MB)
   59.455669 (    0.012035)| [    0.000000] efi: mem114: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b9d8000-0x000000006b9de000) (0MB)
   59.463439 (    0.007770)| [    0.000000] efi: mem115: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b9de000-0x000000006b9e1000) (0MB)
   59.475596 (    0.012157)| [    0.000000] efi: mem116: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b9e1000-0x000000006b9e5000) (0MB)
   59.483369 (    0.007773)| [    0.000000] efi: mem117: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b9e5000-0x000000006b9e6000) (0MB)
   59.491762 (    0.008393)| [    0.000000] efi: mem118: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b9e6000-0x000000006b9e8000) (0MB)
   59.503790 (    0.012028)| [    0.000000] efi: mem119: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b9e8000-0x000000006b9ea000) (0MB)
   59.511560 (    0.007770)| [    0.000000] efi: mem120: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006b9ea000-0x000000006ba00000) (0MB)
   59.523721 (    0.012161)| [    0.000000] efi: mem121: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006ba00000-0x000000006ba47000) (0MB)
   59.531549 (    0.007828)| [    0.000000] efi: mem122: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006ba47000-0x000000006ba84000) (0MB)
   59.539698 (    0.008149)| [    0.000000] efi: mem123: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006ba84000-0x000000006bad2000) (0MB)
   59.551482 (    0.011784)| [    0.000000] efi: mem124: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bad2000-0x000000006bae6000) (0MB)
   59.559690 (    0.008208)| [    0.000000] efi: mem125: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bae6000-0x000000006bb1e000) (0MB)
   59.574471 (    0.014781)| [    0.000000] efi: mem126: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bb1e000-0x000000006bb22000) (0MB)
   59.579618 (    0.005147)| [    0.000000] efi: mem127: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bb22000-0x000000007ca9c000) (271MB)
   59.587390 (    0.007772)| [    0.000000] efi: mem128: type=6, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007ca9c000-0x000000007ca9d000) (0MB)
   59.599441 (    0.012051)| [    0.000000] efi: mem129: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000007ca9d000-0x000000007cab0000) (0MB)
   59.611598 (    0.012157)| [    0.000000] efi: mem130: type=6, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007cab0000-0x000000007ccf0000) (2MB)
   59.659388 (    0.047790)| [    0.000000] efi: mem131: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000007ccf0000-0x000000007d9ff000) (13MB)
   59.659520 (    0.000132)| [    0.000000] efi: mem132: type=6, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007d9ff000-0x000000007daff000) (1MB)
   59.659639 (    0.000119)| [    0.000000] efi: mem133: type=5, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007daff000-0x000000007dbff000) (1MB)
   59.672694 (    0.013055)| [    0.000000] efi: mem134: type=0, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000007dbff000-0x000000007dcff000) (1MB)
   59.672828 (    0.000134)| [    0.000000] efi: mem135: type=10, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000007dcff000-0x000000007eeff000) (18MB)
   59.684801 (    0.011973)| [    0.000000] efi: mem136: type=9, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000007eeff000-0x000000007efea000) (0MB)
   59.696460 (    0.011659)| [    0.000000] efi: mem137: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000007efea000-0x000000007f000000) (0MB)
   59.708492 (    0.012032)| [    0.000000] efi: mem138: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000000100000000-0x0000000840000000) (29696MB)
   59.719825 (    0.011333)| [    0.000000] efi: mem139: type=7, attr=0xf, range=[0x0000001000000000-0x00000017bf000000) (31728MB)
   59.719960 (    0.000135)| [    0.000000] efi: mem140: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000000, range=[0x0000000080000000-0x0000000090000000) (256MB)
   59.723610 (    0.003650)| [    0.000000] efi: mem141: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x00000000f8000000-0x00000000fe000000) (96MB)
   59.735667 (    0.012057)| [    0.000000] efi: mem142: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x00000000fed1c000-0x00000000fed20000) (0MB)
   59.743450 (    0.007783)| [    0.000000] efi: mem143: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x000000ff00000000-0x000000ff03e00000) (62MB)
   59.755628 (    0.012178)| [    0.000000] efi: mem144: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x000000ff03f00000-0x000000ff04000000) (1MB)
   59.767682 (    0.012054)| [    0.000000] efi: mem145: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x000000ff07f00000-0x000000ff08000000) (1MB)
   59.779483 (    0.011801)| [    0.000000] efi: mem146: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x000000ff40000000-0x000000ff43000000) (48MB)
   59.791533 (    0.012050)| [    0.000000] efi: mem147: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x000000ff44000000-0x000000ff47000000) (48MB)
   59.799702 (    0.008169)| [    0.000000] efi: mem148: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x000000ff48000000-0x000000ff4b000000) (48MB)
   59.811505 (    0.011803)| [    0.000000] efi: mem149: type=11, attr=0x8000000000000001, range=[0x000000ff4c000000-0x000000ff4f000000) (48MB)
[...]
   67.055714 (    0.008325)| [    5.971040] EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
   67.059441 (    0.003727)| [    5.976599] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
   67.067807 (    0.008366)| [    5.984386] IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f
   67.075529 (    0.007722)| [    5.990230] PGD 0
   67.075570 (    0.000041)| [    5.992484] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP
   67.079368 (    0.003798)| [    5.996107] Modules linked in:
   67.083673 (    0.004305)| [    5.999516] CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.10.0-rc2-0.55.el7-rja+ #1
   67.091427 (    0.007754)| [    6.007861] Hardware name: SGI UV2000/ROMLEY, BIOS SGI UV 2000/3000 series BIOS 01/15/2013
   67.099815 (    0.008388)| [    6.017082] task: ffff880815938000 ti: ffff880815932000 task.ti: ffff880815932000
   67.107751 (    0.007936)| [    6.025428] RIP: 0010:[<ffff88007dbf2140>]  [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f
   67.115507 (    0.007756)| [    6.033978] RSP: 0018:ffff8808159338d0 EFLAGS: 00010002
   67.123613 (    0.008106)| [    6.039903] RAX: 000000007ca95ad0 RBX: 000000000000006a RCX: 0000000090000002
   67.131365 (    0.007752)| [    6.047860] RDX: 0000000003050007 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffff88007dbf6ea8
   67.139730 (    0.008365)| [    6.055818] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
   67.147482 (    0.007752)| [    6.063776] R10: ffff880820801500 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000003050007
   67.155614 (    0.008132)| [    6.071732] R13: 0000000090000002 R14: ffff880815933db8 R15: 0000000000000000
   67.163362 (    0.007748)| [    6.079690] FS:  0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8817bec00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
   67.171744 (    0.008382)| [    6.088715] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
   67.179475 (    0.007731)| [    6.095122] CR2: 000000007ca95b10 CR3: 00000000018fd000 CR4: 00000000000407e0
   67.187605 (    0.008130)| [    6.103082] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
   67.195355 (    0.007750)| [    6.111039] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
   67.203724 (    0.008369)| [    6.118997] Stack:
   67.203764 (    0.000040)| [    6.121238]  0000000000000010 0000000000000246 ffffffff20815a80 ffff88083ffd9d80
   67.221504 (    0.017740)| [    6.129527]  0000000000000010 ffff88083ffdab08 0000000000000000 ffff88083ffd9d80
   67.233872 (    0.012368)| [    6.137819]  0000000000000010 0000000000000002 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
   67.245638 (    0.011766)| [    6.146110] Call Trace:
   67.245689 (    0.000051)| [    6.148847]  [<ffffffff81139a34>] ?  __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x154/0x2f0
   67.247488 (    0.001799)| [    6.156125]  [<ffffffff81174f7d>] ?  alloc_page_interleave+0x9d/0xa0
   67.247582 (    0.000094)| [    6.163120]  [<ffffffff812fe192>] ?  put_dec+0x72/0x90
   67.281377 (    0.033795)| [    6.168756]  [<ffffffff812f6d53>] ?  ida_get_new_above+0xb3/0x220
   67.281469 (    0.000092)| [    6.175449]  [<ffffffff812f6174>] ?  sub_alloc+0x74/0x1d0
   67.281550 (    0.000081)| [    6.181372]  [<ffffffff812f6174>] ?  sub_alloc+0x74/0x1d0
   67.281619 (    0.000069)| [    6.187305]  [<ffffffff812f6d53>] ?  ida_get_new_above+0xb3/0x220
   67.283631 (    0.002012)| [    6.194010]  [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
   67.283748 (    0.000117)| [    6.201974]  [<ffffffff810499b3>] ?  efi_call3+0x43/0x80
   67.291432 (    0.007684)| [    6.207803]  [<ffffffff810492a7>] ?  virt_efi_get_next_variable+0x47/0x1c0
   67.299795 (    0.008363)| [    6.215374]  [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
   67.307545 (    0.007750)| [    6.223340]  [<ffffffff814c7b55>] ?  efivar_init+0xd5/0x390
   67.311384 (    0.003839)| [    6.229458]  [<ffffffff814c8ae0>] ?  efivar_update_sysfs_entries+0x90/0x90
   67.319748 (    0.008364)| [    6.237032]  [<ffffffff812f906b>] ?  kobject_uevent+0xb/0x10
   67.327478 (    0.007730)| [    6.243247]  [<ffffffff812f812b>] ?  kset_register+0x5b/0x70
   67.331822 (    0.004344)| [    6.249469]  [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
   67.339570 (    0.007748)| [    6.257428]  [<ffffffff814c8d47>] ?  efivars_sysfs_init+0x87/0xf0
   67.347684 (    0.008114)| [    6.264129]  [<ffffffff8100032a>] ?  do_one_initcall+0x15a/0x1b0
   67.355415 (    0.007731)| [    6.270738]  [<ffffffff81a17831>] ?  do_basic_setup+0xad/0xce
   67.359500 (    0.004085)| [    6.277051]  [<ffffffff81a17ae3>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x291/0x291
   67.367616 (    0.008116)| [    6.284142]  [<ffffffff81a3708a>] ?  sched_init_smp+0x15b/0x162
   67.375352 (    0.007736)| [    6.290648]  [<ffffffff81a17a5f>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x20d/0x291
   67.379705 (    0.004353)| [    6.297739]  [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80
   67.387425 (    0.007720)| [    6.303566]  [<ffffffff81601ebe>] ?  kernel_init+0xe/0x180
   67.391507 (    0.004082)| [    6.309588]  [<ffffffff8162179c>] ?  ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
   67.399616 (    0.008109)| [    6.315803]  [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80
   67.403574 (    0.003958)| [    6.321628] Code: 8b d8 e8 e4 fa ff ff 84 c0 75 0f 48 8b 15 61 58 00 00 48 8b 4c 24 30 ff 52 48 48 8b c3 eb 58 48 8b 05 4d 58 00 00 48 85 c0 74 42 <48> 83 78 40 00 74 3b 48 83 78 48 00 74 34 48 8d 53 14 4c 8d 44
   67.427797 (    0.024223)| [    6.343375] RIP  [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f
   67.431635 (    0.003838)| [    6.349310]  RSP <ffff8808159338d0>
   67.435568 (    0.003933)| [    6.353198] CR2: 000000007ca95b10
   67.439379 (    0.003811)| [    6.356901] ---[ end trace 0d9ca8269f302599 ]---
   67.443710 (    0.004331)| [    6.362116] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! exitcode=0x00000009

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#3 lore raw
Quoted 1 line · Russ Anderson
   efi: mem127: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bb22000-0x000000007ca9c000) (271MB)

EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 1 line
   efi: mem133: type=5, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007daff000-0x000000007dbff000) (1MB)

EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 3 lines
   EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
   BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
   IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f

This...

Quoted 9 lines
   Call Trace:
    [<ffffffff81139a34>] ?  __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x154/0x2f0
    [<ffffffff81174f7d>] ?  alloc_page_interleave+0x9d/0xa0
    [<ffffffff812fe192>] ?  put_dec+0x72/0x90
    [<ffffffff812f6d53>] ?  ida_get_new_above+0xb3/0x220
    [<ffffffff812f6174>] ?  sub_alloc+0x74/0x1d0
    [<ffffffff812f6174>] ?  sub_alloc+0x74/0x1d0
    [<ffffffff812f6d53>] ?  ida_get_new_above+0xb3/0x220
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150

is junk on the stack.

Quoted 10 lines
    [<ffffffff810499b3>] ?  efi_call3+0x43/0x80
    [<ffffffff810492a7>] ?  virt_efi_get_next_variable+0x47/0x1c0
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c7b55>] ?  efivar_init+0xd5/0x390
    [<ffffffff814c8ae0>] ?  efivar_update_sysfs_entries+0x90/0x90
    [<ffffffff812f906b>] ?  kobject_uevent+0xb/0x10
    [<ffffffff812f812b>] ?  kset_register+0x5b/0x70
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c8d47>] ?  efivars_sysfs_init+0x87/0xf0
    [<ffffffff8100032a>] ?  do_one_initcall+0x15a/0x1b0
Quoted 8 lines
    [<ffffffff81a17831>] ?  do_basic_setup+0xad/0xce
    [<ffffffff81a17ae3>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x291/0x291
    [<ffffffff81a3708a>] ?  sched_init_smp+0x15b/0x162
    [<ffffffff81a17a5f>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x20d/0x291
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80
    [<ffffffff81601ebe>] ?  kernel_init+0xe/0x180
    [<ffffffff8162179c>] ?  ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80

Here's the real call stack leading up to the crash.

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);

that later makes GetNextVariable() jump to the physical address of the EFI Boot Services region. Because if not, we need to do some more digging.

Borislav, how are your 1:1 mapping patches coming along? In theory, once those are merged we can gracefully workaround these kinds of issues.

Signature · 1 line
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
maintainer
#4 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · Matt Fleming

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug.

I'm speechless. Let's have someone else do the ranting this time:

http://www.happyassassin.net/2013/05/03/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-firmware-engineer/

Quoted 16 lines

Again, we have seen other machines that access
physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);
Quoted 6 lines

that later makes GetNextVariable() jump to the physical address of the EFI Boot Services region. Because if not, we need to do some more digging.

Borislav, how are your 1:1 mapping patches coming along? In theory, once those are merged we can gracefully workaround these kinds of issues.

What do you mean, map boot time functions 1:1 too?

In any case, I think I have an idea about the bug I was discussing with hpa recently but I need to do more experimenting. I have the next week off, though, so don't hold your breath just yet :).

#5 lore raw
Quoted 1 line · Borislav Petkov

What do you mean, map boot time functions 1:1 too?

Yep, that's what I meant.

Signature · 1 line
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
#6 lore raw
In reply to Matt Fleming

Russ,

Can we open a bug for the BIOS folks and see if we can get this addressed?

Robin

Quoted 85 lines · Matt Fleming
Quoted 1 line · Russ Anderson
   efi: mem127: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bb22000-0x000000007ca9c000) (271MB)

EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 1 line
   efi: mem133: type=5, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007daff000-0x000000007dbff000) (1MB)

EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 3 lines
   EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
   BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
   IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f

This...

Quoted 9 lines
   Call Trace:
    [<ffffffff81139a34>] ?  __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x154/0x2f0
    [<ffffffff81174f7d>] ?  alloc_page_interleave+0x9d/0xa0
    [<ffffffff812fe192>] ?  put_dec+0x72/0x90
    [<ffffffff812f6d53>] ?  ida_get_new_above+0xb3/0x220
    [<ffffffff812f6174>] ?  sub_alloc+0x74/0x1d0
    [<ffffffff812f6174>] ?  sub_alloc+0x74/0x1d0
    [<ffffffff812f6d53>] ?  ida_get_new_above+0xb3/0x220
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150

is junk on the stack.

Quoted 10 lines
    [<ffffffff810499b3>] ?  efi_call3+0x43/0x80
    [<ffffffff810492a7>] ?  virt_efi_get_next_variable+0x47/0x1c0
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c7b55>] ?  efivar_init+0xd5/0x390
    [<ffffffff814c8ae0>] ?  efivar_update_sysfs_entries+0x90/0x90
    [<ffffffff812f906b>] ?  kobject_uevent+0xb/0x10
    [<ffffffff812f812b>] ?  kset_register+0x5b/0x70
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c8d47>] ?  efivars_sysfs_init+0x87/0xf0
    [<ffffffff8100032a>] ?  do_one_initcall+0x15a/0x1b0
Quoted 8 lines
    [<ffffffff81a17831>] ?  do_basic_setup+0xad/0xce
    [<ffffffff81a17ae3>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x291/0x291
    [<ffffffff81a3708a>] ?  sched_init_smp+0x15b/0x162
    [<ffffffff81a17a5f>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x20d/0x291
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80
    [<ffffffff81601ebe>] ?  kernel_init+0xe/0x180
    [<ffffffff8162179c>] ?  ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80

Here's the real call stack leading up to the crash.

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);

that later makes GetNextVariable() jump to the physical address of the EFI Boot Services region. Because if not, we need to do some more digging.

Borislav, how are your 1:1 mapping patches coming along? In theory, once those are merged we can gracefully workaround these kinds of issues.

Signature · 6 lines
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
#7 lore raw
Quoted 3 lines · Robin Holt

Russ,

Can we open a bug for the BIOS folks and see if we can get this addressed?

I already talked with them. It is not in an area that we normally change, so if there is a bug may be in the Intel reference code. More investigation is needed to track down the actual problem, and that could take help from Intel.

Regardless of that, it is a kernel patch that triggers the problem. This isn't the first time a kernel change does the "right thing" but trips across questionable bios/EFI/bootloader implementation. That still makes it a kernel bug.

I'm still digging to better understand the root problem.

Quoted 88 lines

Robin

Quoted 85 lines · Matt Fleming
Quoted 1 line · Russ Anderson
   efi: mem127: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bb22000-0x000000007ca9c000) (271MB)

EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 1 line
   efi: mem133: type=5, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007daff000-0x000000007dbff000) (1MB)

EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 3 lines
   EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
   BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
   IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f

This...

Quoted 9 lines
   Call Trace:
    [<ffffffff81139a34>] ?  __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x154/0x2f0
    [<ffffffff81174f7d>] ?  alloc_page_interleave+0x9d/0xa0
    [<ffffffff812fe192>] ?  put_dec+0x72/0x90
    [<ffffffff812f6d53>] ?  ida_get_new_above+0xb3/0x220
    [<ffffffff812f6174>] ?  sub_alloc+0x74/0x1d0
    [<ffffffff812f6174>] ?  sub_alloc+0x74/0x1d0
    [<ffffffff812f6d53>] ?  ida_get_new_above+0xb3/0x220
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150

is junk on the stack.

Quoted 10 lines
    [<ffffffff810499b3>] ?  efi_call3+0x43/0x80
    [<ffffffff810492a7>] ?  virt_efi_get_next_variable+0x47/0x1c0
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c7b55>] ?  efivar_init+0xd5/0x390
    [<ffffffff814c8ae0>] ?  efivar_update_sysfs_entries+0x90/0x90
    [<ffffffff812f906b>] ?  kobject_uevent+0xb/0x10
    [<ffffffff812f812b>] ?  kset_register+0x5b/0x70
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c8d47>] ?  efivars_sysfs_init+0x87/0xf0
    [<ffffffff8100032a>] ?  do_one_initcall+0x15a/0x1b0
Quoted 8 lines
    [<ffffffff81a17831>] ?  do_basic_setup+0xad/0xce
    [<ffffffff81a17ae3>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x291/0x291
    [<ffffffff81a3708a>] ?  sched_init_smp+0x15b/0x162
    [<ffffffff81a17a5f>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x20d/0x291
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80
    [<ffffffff81601ebe>] ?  kernel_init+0xe/0x180
    [<ffffffff8162179c>] ?  ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80

Here's the real call stack leading up to the crash.

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);

that later makes GetNextVariable() jump to the physical address of the EFI Boot Services region. Because if not, we need to do some more digging.

Borislav, how are your 1:1 mapping patches coming along? In theory, once those are merged we can gracefully workaround these kinds of issues.

Signature · 6 lines
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#8 lore raw
Quoted 10 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 3 lines · Robin Holt

Russ,

Can we open a bug for the BIOS folks and see if we can get this addressed?

I already talked with them. It is not in an area that we normally change, so if there is a bug may be in the Intel reference code. More investigation is needed to track down the actual problem, and that could take help from Intel.

Quoted 6 lines

Regardless of that, it is a kernel patch that triggers the problem. This isn't the first time a kernel change does the "right thing" but trips across questionable bios/EFI/bootloader implementation. That still makes it a kernel bug.

I'm still digging to better understand the root problem.

When we rebased the Fedora 18 kernel to 3.9 we had a bunch of reports from people who can no longer boot with what looks like similar symptoms.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964335

Dave

#9 lore raw

Hi Dave,

於 五,2013-05-24 於 17:05 -0400,Dave Jones 提到:

Quoted 16 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 15 lines · Robin Holt
Quoted 3 lines

Russ,

Can we open a bug for the BIOS folks and see if we can get this addressed?

I already talked with them. It is not in an area that we normally change, so if there is a bug may be in the Intel reference code. More investigation is needed to track down the actual problem, and that could take help from Intel.

Regardless of that, it is a kernel patch that triggers the problem. This isn't the first time a kernel change does the "right thing" but trips across questionable bios/EFI/bootloader implementation. That still makes it a kernel bug.

Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 1 line

I'm still digging to better understand the root problem.

When we rebased the Fedora 18 kernel to 3.9 we had a bunch of reports from people who can no longer boot with what looks like similar symptoms.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964335

Dave

The oops on the above bug is similar to my problem on Acer machine, could you please ask the reporter try the eccaf52f patch in urgent branch on Matt's efi git tree:

https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mfleming/efi.git/commit/?h=urgent&id=eccaf52fee8305d5207ff110950a82c100e459bc

Thanks!
Joey Lee

#10 lore raw

於 一,2013-05-27 於 12:27 +0800,joeyli 提到:

Quoted 33 lines

Hi Dave,

於 五,2013-05-24 於 17:05 -0400,Dave Jones 提到:

Quoted 16 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 15 lines · Robin Holt
Quoted 3 lines

Russ,

Can we open a bug for the BIOS folks and see if we can get this addressed?

I already talked with them. It is not in an area that we normally change, so if there is a bug may be in the Intel reference code. More investigation is needed to track down the actual problem, and that could take help from Intel.

Regardless of that, it is a kernel patch that triggers the problem. This isn't the first time a kernel change does the "right thing" but trips across questionable bios/EFI/bootloader implementation. That still makes it a kernel bug.

Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 1 line

I'm still digging to better understand the root problem.

When we rebased the Fedora 18 kernel to 3.9 we had a bunch of reports from people who can no longer boot with what looks like similar symptoms.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964335

Dave

The oops on the above bug is similar to my problem on Acer machine, could you please ask the reporter try the eccaf52f patch in urgent branch on Matt's efi git tree:

Quoted 5 lines

https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mfleming/efi.git/commit/?h=urgent&id=eccaf52fee8305d5207ff110950a82c100e459bc

Thanks!
Joey Lee

Looks there have a couple of different machines on this bug. The oops similar to my machine is reported by josephhenryblack.

Thanks
Joey Lee

#11 lore raw
In reply to joeyli
Quoted 26 lines · joeyli

Hi Dave,

於 五,2013-05-24 於 17:05 -0400,Dave Jones 提到:

Quoted 23 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 10 lines · Robin Holt
Quoted 3 lines

Russ,

Can we open a bug for the BIOS folks and see if we can get this addressed?

I already talked with them. It is not in an area that we normally change, so if there is a bug may be in the Intel reference code. More investigation is needed to track down the actual problem, and that could take help from Intel.

Quoted 6 lines

Regardless of that, it is a kernel patch that triggers the problem. This isn't the first time a kernel change does the "right thing" but trips across questionable bios/EFI/bootloader implementation. That still makes it a kernel bug.

I'm still digging to better understand the root problem.

When we rebased the Fedora 18 kernel to 3.9 we had a bunch of reports from people who can no longer boot with what looks like similar symptoms.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964335

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Dave

The oops on the above bug is similar to my problem on Acer machine, could you please ask the reporter try the eccaf52f patch in urgent branch on Matt's efi git tree:

https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mfleming/efi.git/commit/?h=urgent&id=eccaf52fee8305d5207ff110950a82c100e459bc

I tried that patch, but it does not fix the problem.

Thanks for the suggestion.

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#12 lore raw
In reply to Matt Fleming
Quoted 51 lines · Matt Fleming
Quoted 1 line · Russ Anderson
   efi: mem127: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bb22000-0x000000007ca9c000) (271MB)

EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 1 line
   efi: mem133: type=5, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007daff000-0x000000007dbff000) (1MB)

EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 14 lines
   EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
   BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
   IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f

    [<ffffffff810499b3>] ?  efi_call3+0x43/0x80
    [<ffffffff810492a7>] ?  virt_efi_get_next_variable+0x47/0x1c0
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c7b55>] ?  efivar_init+0xd5/0x390
    [<ffffffff814c8ae0>] ?  efivar_update_sysfs_entries+0x90/0x90
    [<ffffffff812f906b>] ?  kobject_uevent+0xb/0x10
    [<ffffffff812f812b>] ?  kset_register+0x5b/0x70
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c8d47>] ?  efivars_sysfs_init+0x87/0xf0
    [<ffffffff8100032a>] ?  do_one_initcall+0x15a/0x1b0
Quoted 8 lines
    [<ffffffff81a17831>] ?  do_basic_setup+0xad/0xce
    [<ffffffff81a17ae3>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x291/0x291
    [<ffffffff81a3708a>] ?  sched_init_smp+0x15b/0x162
    [<ffffffff81a17a5f>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x20d/0x291
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80
    [<ffffffff81601ebe>] ?  kernel_init+0xe/0x180
    [<ffffffff8162179c>] ?  ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80

Here's the real call stack leading up to the crash.

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

Quoted 5 lines
	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);

This call is failing, but not returning a valid EFI_* return status. setup_efi_vars() returns at that point. Maybe it is not set up to do GetNextVariable() later on??? Why call GetNextVariable() if the earlier call failed?

Quoted 3 lines

that later makes GetNextVariable() jump to the physical address of the EFI Boot Services region. Because if not, we need to do some more digging.

One other data point is if the query_variable_info call is hacked to remove one of the EFI flags (ie comment out EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS) the efi_call_phys4() call fails with EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER and the system boots. Of course it does not create /sys/firmware/efivars entries and complains "[Firmware Bug]: efi: Inconsistent initial sizes". But at least it boots.

One of the BIOS guys will build a debug bios next week to help see what is going on in the query_variable_info() call.

Quoted 5 lines

Borislav, how are your 1:1 mapping patches coming along? In theory, once those are merged we can gracefully workaround these kinds of issues.

Signature · 1 line
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#13 lore raw
Quoted 6 lines · Russ Anderson

One other data point is if the query_variable_info call is hacked to remove one of the EFI flags (ie comment out EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS) the efi_call_phys4() call fails with EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER and the system boots. Of course it does not create /sys/firmware/efivars entries and complains "[Firmware Bug]: efi: Inconsistent initial sizes". But at least it boots.

EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS is only legal if EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS is set, so it's correct to throw EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER there.

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#14 lore raw
Quoted 9 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 6 lines · Russ Anderson

One other data point is if the query_variable_info call is hacked to remove one of the EFI flags (ie comment out EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS) the efi_call_phys4() call fails with EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER and the system boots. Of course it does not create /sys/firmware/efivars entries and complains "[Firmware Bug]: efi: Inconsistent initial sizes". But at least it boots.

Quoted 3 lines

EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS is only legal if EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS is set, so it's correct to throw EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER there.

Yes. The point of the experiment was to see if it returned a valid failure status (which it did) and see if the boot still failed (which it didn't). So something about going deeper into that call seems to trigger the failure.

Why does the kernel still try to create /sys/firmware/efivars/ entries in the original failure even though efi_call_phys4() failed? Or does it always try to create those entries and GetNextVariable() blows up in the original failure but not in my experiment?

Thanks,

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#15 lore raw
Quoted 5 lines · Russ Anderson

Why does the kernel still try to create /sys/firmware/efivars/ entries in the original failure even though efi_call_phys4() failed? Or does it always try to create those entries and GetNextVariable() blows up in the original failure but not in my experiment?

CONFIG_EFI_VARS will try to create /sys/firmware/efivars even without the additional info from the early EFI boot variable code. The early variable code is only a heuristic that is supposed to improve the anti-bricking algorithm in the EFI variable code.

Signature · 1 line
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
#16 lore raw
In reply to Russ Anderson
Quoted 2 lines · Russ Anderson

One of the BIOS guys will build a debug bios next week to help see what is going on in the query_variable_info() call.

That would be incredibly useful, thanks.

Signature · 1 line
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
#17 lore raw
In reply to Matt Fleming
Quoted 23 lines · Matt Fleming

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);
Quoted 6 lines

that later makes GetNextVariable() jump to the physical address of the EFI Boot Services region. Because if not, we need to do some more digging.

Borislav, how are your 1:1 mapping patches coming along? In theory, once those are merged we can gracefully workaround these kinds of issues.

Handling these gracefully without crashing boxes or expecting firmware to be sane (which is wishful thinking) would be _SO_ preferred ...

I suspect 1:1 mapped is what Windows does - and we simply need to provide a Windows-EFI compatible environment (which is reality), not just an EFI-spec environment (which is a fiction).

Thanks,

Ingo

#18 lore raw
In reply to Matt Fleming
Quoted 51 lines · Matt Fleming
Quoted 1 line · Russ Anderson
   efi: mem127: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bb22000-0x000000007ca9c000) (271MB)

EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 1 line
   efi: mem133: type=5, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007daff000-0x000000007dbff000) (1MB)

EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 14 lines
   EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
   BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
   IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f

    [<ffffffff810499b3>] ?  efi_call3+0x43/0x80
    [<ffffffff810492a7>] ?  virt_efi_get_next_variable+0x47/0x1c0
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c7b55>] ?  efivar_init+0xd5/0x390
    [<ffffffff814c8ae0>] ?  efivar_update_sysfs_entries+0x90/0x90
    [<ffffffff812f906b>] ?  kobject_uevent+0xb/0x10
    [<ffffffff812f812b>] ?  kset_register+0x5b/0x70
    [<ffffffff814c8cc0>] ?  create_efivars_bin_attributes+0x150/0x150
    [<ffffffff814c8d47>] ?  efivars_sysfs_init+0x87/0xf0
    [<ffffffff8100032a>] ?  do_one_initcall+0x15a/0x1b0
Quoted 8 lines
    [<ffffffff81a17831>] ?  do_basic_setup+0xad/0xce
    [<ffffffff81a17ae3>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x291/0x291
    [<ffffffff81a3708a>] ?  sched_init_smp+0x15b/0x162
    [<ffffffff81a17a5f>] ?  kernel_init_freeable+0x20d/0x291
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80
    [<ffffffff81601ebe>] ?  kernel_init+0xe/0x180
    [<ffffffff8162179c>] ?  ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
    [<ffffffff81601eb0>] ?  rest_init+0x80/0x80

Here's the real call stack leading up to the crash.

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

Quoted 5 lines
	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);

This does trigger the problem. Note that the definition of QueryVariableInfo() in the UEFI spec says:

The returned MaximumVariableStorageSize, RemainingVariableStorageSize, MaximumVariableSize information may change immediately after the call based on other runtime activities including asynchronous error events. Also, these values associated with different attributes are not additive in nature.

Note the values may be accurate at the point in time when returned, but may not be after that.

After the system has transitioned into runtime (after ExitBootServices() is called), an implementation may not be able to accurately return information about the Boot Services variable store. In such cases, EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER should be returned.

It is not clear to me exactly when ExitBootServices() is called. Our bios is returning a failing indication on the call.

The description from commit cc5a080c5d40c36089bb08a8a16fa3fc7047fe0f is:

efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code

EFI variables can be flagged as being accessible only within boot services. This makes it awkward for us to figure out how much space they use at runtime. In theory we could figure this out by simply comparing the results from QueryVariableInfo() to the space used by all of our variables, but that fails if the platform doesn't garbage collect on every boot. Thankfully, calling QueryVariableInfo() while still inside boot services gives a more reliable answer. This patch passes that information from the EFI boot stub up to the efi platform code.

"more reliable" is a relative answer. Saving those values for later use seems inconsistent with the UEFI spec.

Quoted 9 lines

that later makes GetNextVariable() jump to the physical address of the EFI Boot Services region. Because if not, we need to do some more digging.

Borislav, how are your 1:1 mapping patches coming along? In theory, once those are merged we can gracefully workaround these kinds of issues.

Signature · 1 line
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#19 lore raw
Quoted 35 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 17 lines

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

Quoted 5 lines
	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);

This does trigger the problem. Note that the definition of QueryVariableInfo() in the UEFI spec says:

The returned MaximumVariableStorageSize, RemainingVariableStorageSize, MaximumVariableSize information may change immediately after the call based on other runtime activities including asynchronous error events. Also, these values associated with different attributes are not additive in nature.

Note the values may be accurate at the point in time when returned, but may not be after that.

Quoted 7 lines

After the system has transitioned into runtime (after ExitBootServices() is called), an implementation may not be able to accurately return information about the Boot Services variable store. In such cases, EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER should be returned.

It is not clear to me exactly when ExitBootServices() is called. Our bios is returning a failing indication on the call.

Yes, but this call is clearly happening way before ExitBootServices() -- see the surrounding code, see for example this in efi_main():

[ ... snip ... ]

	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);

	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);

	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*gdt),
				(void **)&gdt);
	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
		efi_printk("Failed to alloc mem for gdt structure\n");
		goto fail;
	}

[ ... snip ... ]

We are calling QueryVariableInfo() in setup_efi_vars(), and later on AllocatePool is being called (through boot table). That'd inherently fail if we were calling it after ExitBootServices() has happened, but I believe that call is succeeding on your affected system as well.

Signature · 2 lines
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
#20 lore raw
Quoted 60 lines · Jiri Kosina
Quoted 35 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 17 lines

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

Quoted 5 lines
	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);

This does trigger the problem. Note that the definition of QueryVariableInfo() in the UEFI spec says:

The returned MaximumVariableStorageSize, RemainingVariableStorageSize, MaximumVariableSize information may change immediately after the call based on other runtime activities including asynchronous error events. Also, these values associated with different attributes are not additive in nature.

Note the values may be accurate at the point in time when returned, but may not be after that.

Quoted 7 lines

After the system has transitioned into runtime (after ExitBootServices() is called), an implementation may not be able to accurately return information about the Boot Services variable store. In such cases, EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER should be returned.

It is not clear to me exactly when ExitBootServices() is called. Our bios is returning a failing indication on the call.

Yes, but this call is clearly happening way before ExitBootServices() -- see the surrounding code, see for example this in efi_main():

[ ... snip ... ]

	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);

	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);

	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*gdt),
				(void **)&gdt);
	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
		efi_printk("Failed to alloc mem for gdt structure\n");
		goto fail;
	}
Quoted 1 line

[ ... snip ... ]

Yes. Note the failing call is sys_table->runtime while all the other calls are sys_table->boottime and seem to work. Not sure why the sys_table->runtime call has a problem but it may be a clue. Could something in the runtime path not be set up???

Quoted 2 lines

We are calling QueryVariableInfo() in setup_efi_vars(), and later on AllocatePool is being called (through boot table).

On my system the QueryVariableInfo() call fails, so AllocatePool() is not called in setup_efi_vars().

Quoted 7 lines

That'd inherently fail
if we were calling it after ExitBootServices() has happened, but I believe that call is succeeding on your affected system as well.

Signature · 2 lines
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#21 lore raw
Quoted 17 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 15 lines

Yes, but this call is clearly happening way before ExitBootServices() -- see the surrounding code, see for example this in efi_main():

[ ... snip ... ]

	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);

	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);

	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*gdt),
				(void **)&gdt);
	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
		efi_printk("Failed to alloc mem for gdt structure\n");
		goto fail;
	}
Quoted 1 line

[ ... snip ... ]

Quoted 4 lines

Yes. Note the failing call is sys_table->runtime while all the other calls are sys_table->boottime and seem to work. Not sure why the sys_table->runtime call has a problem but it may be a clue. Could something in the runtime path not be set up???

That was my original idea early today as well. My understanding of the UEFI spec is admittedly limited, but afaics calling runtime method from boot environment should be a valid thing to do ... ?

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines

We are calling QueryVariableInfo() in setup_efi_vars(), and later on AllocatePool is being called (through boot table).

On my system the QueryVariableInfo() call fails, so AllocatePool() is not called in setup_efi_vars().

But it's being called later on coming back to efi_main(). That was just a poor man's demonstration attempt why this code is running before ExitBootServices() has been called.

Signature · 2 lines
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
#22 lore raw

於 四,2013-05-30 於 00:53 +0200,Jiri Kosina 提到:

Quoted 19 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 18 lines
Quoted 17 lines

Yes, but this call is clearly happening way before ExitBootServices() -- see the surrounding code, see for example this in efi_main():

[ ... snip ... ]

	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);

	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);

	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*gdt),
				(void **)&gdt);
	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
		efi_printk("Failed to alloc mem for gdt structure\n");
		goto fail;
	}

[ ... snip ... ]

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

Yes. Note the failing call is sys_table->runtime while all the other calls are sys_table->boottime and seem to work. Not sure why the sys_table->runtime call has a problem but it may be a clue. Could something in the runtime path not be set up???

That was my original idea early today as well. My understanding of the UEFI spec is admittedly limited, but afaics calling runtime method from boot environment should be a valid thing to do ... ?

QueryVariableInfo() is a runtime services, all runtime services should available bother on boot time and runtime:

UEFI spec 2.3.1 P.109:
Runtime Services
Functions that are available before and after any call to ExitBootServices(). These functions are described in Section 7.

Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines

We are calling QueryVariableInfo() in setup_efi_vars(), and later on AllocatePool is being called (through boot table).

On my system the QueryVariableInfo() call fails, so AllocatePool() is not called in setup_efi_vars().

But it's being called later on coming back to efi_main(). That was just a poor man's demonstration attempt why this code is running before ExitBootServices() has been called.

Yes, I agreed your point, the space information of EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS should still return by QueryVariableInfo() because we call it before ExitBootServices():

arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
efi_main(void *handle, efi_system_table_t *_table, struct boot_params *boot_params)

	..
	sys_table = _table;
	/* Check if we were booted by the EFI firmware */
	if (sys_table->hdr.signature != EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE_SIGNATURE)
		goto fail;
	boot_params->secure_boot = get_secure_boot(sys_table)			/* check does BIOS in secure boot mode */
	setup_graphics(boot_params);
	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);						/* Pass boot services variable info to runtime code, call QueryVariableInfo() */
	...
	status = exit_boot(boot_params, handle);				/* call ExitBootServices() */
	...

Thanks a lot!
Joey Lee

#23 lore raw
Quoted 29 lines · joeyli

於 四,2013-05-30 於 00:53 +0200,Jiri Kosina 提到:

Quoted 19 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 18 lines
Quoted 17 lines

Yes, but this call is clearly happening way before ExitBootServices() -- see the surrounding code, see for example this in efi_main():

[ ... snip ... ]

	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);

	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);

	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*gdt),
				(void **)&gdt);
	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
		efi_printk("Failed to alloc mem for gdt structure\n");
		goto fail;
	}

[ ... snip ... ]

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

Yes. Note the failing call is sys_table->runtime while all the other calls are sys_table->boottime and seem to work. Not sure why the sys_table->runtime call has a problem but it may be a clue. Could something in the runtime path not be set up???

That was my original idea early today as well. My understanding of the UEFI spec is admittedly limited, but afaics calling runtime method from boot environment should be a valid thing to do ... ?

Quoted 7 lines

QueryVariableInfo() is a runtime services, all runtime services should available bother on boot time and runtime:

UEFI spec 2.3.1 P.109:
Runtime Services
Functions that are available before and after any call to ExitBootServices(). These functions are described in Section 7.

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

Thanks,

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]

Move query_variable_info call to runtime to avoid bios issues.

---
 arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c |   49 ---------------------------------------
 arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c      |   35 ++++++++++++---------------
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c +0 -49
Index: linux/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
===================================================================
@@ -251,53 +251,6 @@ static void find_bits(unsigned long mask
 	*size = len;
 }
 
-static efi_status_t setup_efi_vars(struct boot_params *params)
-{
-	struct setup_data *data;
-	struct efi_var_bootdata *efidata;
-	u64 store_size, remaining_size, var_size;
-	efi_status_t status;
-
-	if (sys_table->runtime->hdr.revision < EFI_2_00_SYSTEM_TABLE_REVISION)
-		return EFI_UNSUPPORTED;
-
-	data = (struct setup_data *)(unsigned long)params->hdr.setup_data;
-
-	while (data && data->next)
-		data = (struct setup_data *)(unsigned long)data->next;
-
-	status = efi_call_phys4((void *)sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
-				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
-				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
-				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
-				&remaining_size, &var_size);
-
-	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) { // RJA
-		efi_printk("RJA: setup_efi_vars FAILED\n");
-		return status;
-	}
-
-	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
-				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*efidata), &efidata);
-
-	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
-		return status;
-
-	efidata->data.type = SETUP_EFI_VARS;
-	efidata->data.len = sizeof(struct efi_var_bootdata) -
-		sizeof(struct setup_data);
-	efidata->data.next = 0;
-	efidata->store_size = store_size;
-	efidata->remaining_size = remaining_size;
-	efidata->max_var_size = var_size;
-
-	if (data)
-		data->next = (unsigned long)efidata;
-	else
-		params->hdr.setup_data = (unsigned long)efidata;
-
-}
-
 static efi_status_t setup_efi_pci(struct boot_params *params)
 {
 	efi_pci_io_protocol *pci;
@@ -1204,8 +1157,6 @@ struct boot_params *efi_main(void *handl
 
 	setup_graphics(boot_params);
 
-	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);
-
 	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);
 
 	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c +16 -19
Index: linux/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
===================================================================
@@ -786,9 +786,6 @@ void __init efi_init(void)
 	char vendor[100] = "unknown";
 	int i = 0;
 	void *tmp;
-	struct setup_data *data;
-	struct efi_var_bootdata *efi_var_data;
-	u64 pa_data;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
 	if (boot_params.efi_info.efi_systab_hi ||
@@ -806,22 +803,6 @@ void __init efi_init(void)
 	if (efi_systab_init(efi_phys.systab))
 		return;
 
-	pa_data = boot_params.hdr.setup_data;
-	while (pa_data) {
-		data = early_ioremap(pa_data, sizeof(*efi_var_data));
-		if (data->type == SETUP_EFI_VARS) {
-			efi_var_data = (struct efi_var_bootdata *)data;
-
-			efi_var_store_size = efi_var_data->store_size;
-			efi_var_remaining_size = efi_var_data->remaining_size;
-			efi_var_max_var_size = efi_var_data->max_var_size;
-		}
-		pa_data = data->next;
-		early_iounmap(data, sizeof(*efi_var_data));
-	}
-
-	boot_used_size = efi_var_store_size - efi_var_remaining_size;
-
 	set_bit(EFI_SYSTEM_TABLES, &x86_efi_facility);
 
 	/*
@@ -877,7 +858,23 @@ void __init efi_init(void)
 
 void __init efi_late_init(void)
 {
+	efi_status_t status;
+
 	efi_bgrt_init();
+
+	if (efi.runtime_version < EFI_2_00_SYSTEM_TABLE_REVISION)
+		return;
+
+	status = efi_call_virt4(query_variable_info,
+				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
+				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
+				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS,
+				&efi_var_max_var_size, &efi_var_remaining_size,
+				&efi_var_store_size);
+	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
+		return;
+
+	boot_used_size = efi_var_store_size - efi_var_remaining_size;
 }
 
 void __init efi_set_executable(efi_memory_desc_t *md, bool executable)
#24 lore raw
Quoted 3 lines · Russ Anderson

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

No, that defeats the entire point of the original patch.

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#25 lore raw
Quoted 7 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 3 lines · Russ Anderson

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

No, that defeats the entire point of the original patch.

How so? It is still calling QueryVariableInfo()
before the data is used.

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#26 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

No, that defeats the entire point of the original patch.

How so? It is still calling QueryVariableInfo()
before the data is used.

You lose information provided by QueryVariableInfo() about boot-only variables once the transition boot -> runtime has happened.

Signature · 2 lines
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
#27 lore raw
Quoted 6 lines · Jiri Kosina
Quoted 4 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 3 lines

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line

No, that defeats the entire point of the original patch.

How so? It is still calling QueryVariableInfo()
before the data is used.

You lose information provided by QueryVariableInfo() about boot-only variables once the transition boot -> runtime has happened.

Is that information really more important than the ability to boot?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but linux was able to boot without the boottime QueryVariableInfo() call up until 3.9-rc7, and it still does on systems that do not use EFI stubs (ie grub and elilo). It is only when linux uses EFI stubs (ie grub2) that linux makes the boottime QueryVariableInfo() call. So why is that call, or whatever is dependent on it, more important than booting?

Thanks,

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#28 lore raw

於 四,2013-05-30 於 21:17 -0500,Russ Anderson 提到:

Quoted 28 lines · Jiri Kosina
Quoted 6 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 4 lines

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line

No, that defeats the entire point of the original patch.

How so? It is still calling QueryVariableInfo()
before the data is used.

You lose information provided by QueryVariableInfo() about boot-only variables once the transition boot -> runtime has happened.

Is that information really more important than the ability to boot?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but linux was able to boot without the boottime QueryVariableInfo() call up until 3.9-rc7, and it still does on systems that do not use EFI stubs (ie grub and elilo). It is only when linux uses EFI stubs (ie grub2) that linux makes the boottime QueryVariableInfo() call. So why is that call, or whatever is dependent on it, more important than booting?

Quoted 1 line

Thanks,

It related to BIOS's garbage collection behavior of UEFI variable storage.

The used space of non volatile boottime variables is useful to us for calculate the active_size, please reference 31ff2f2 patch:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/15/476

An earlier 68d9298 patch to avoid some machines bricked when more than 50% of the system flash is in use, because the garbage collection will not trigger on those machines.

We need find out the size of system flash space indeed usage for avoid this problem. So, cc5a080c5 patch call QueryVariableInfo() to grab the usage information in boot time.

Calling QueryVariableInfo() at boot time should not causes side effect until your issue show up. Before this issue happen, avoid bricking some machines is also important.

Thanks a lot!
Joey Lee

#29 lore raw
In reply to Russ Anderson
Quoted 11 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 7 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 3 lines · Russ Anderson

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

No, that defeats the entire point of the original patch.

How so? It is still calling QueryVariableInfo()
before the data is used.

We want to know how much space is used by variables that aren't visible at runtime.

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#30 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 7 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 6 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 3 lines · Russ Anderson

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line

No, that defeats the entire point of the original patch.

How so? It is still calling QueryVariableInfo()
before the data is used.

We want to know how much space is used by variables that aren't visible at runtime.

We want to boot. We could boot up through 3.9-rc7.

Knowing how much space is used by variables that aren't visible at runtime it moot if you can't boot.

And again, maybe this is a bios bug - we have bios people looking into it - and maybe that call _should_ work, but the fact is the kernel booted without that change[1] and does not boot with it.

[1] commit cc5a080c5d40c36089bb08a8a16fa3fc7047fe0f

Thanks,

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#31 lore raw
Quoted 14 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 13 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 11 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 7 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 3 lines · Russ Anderson

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

No, that defeats the entire point of the original patch.

How so? It is still calling QueryVariableInfo()
before the data is used.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines

We want to know how much space is used by variables that aren't visible at runtime.

We want to boot. We could boot up through 3.9-rc7.

Knowing how much space is used by variables that aren't visible at runtime it moot if you can't boot.

Exactly - fixing a boot regression is _WAY_ more important than pretty much any other concern.

and the boot breakage is not limited to UV systems - the thread mentioned a couple of other systems as well.

So it's an absolute no-brainer that this change should be reverted or fixed via your patch.

Once a safer mechanism is implemented to call QueryVariableInfo() earlier (Boris's patches?) the change can be reintroduced.

Thanks,

Ingo

#32 lore raw
In reply to Russ Anderson
Quoted 29 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 29 lines
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 16 lines

Yes, but this call is clearly happening way before ExitBootServices() -- see the surrounding code, see for example this in efi_main():

[ ... snip ... ]

	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);

	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);

	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*gdt),
				(void **)&gdt);
	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
		efi_printk("Failed to alloc mem for gdt structure\n");
		goto fail;
	}

[ ... snip ... ]

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

Yes. Note the failing call is sys_table->runtime while all the other calls are sys_table->boottime and seem to work. Not sure why the sys_table->runtime call has a problem but it may be a clue. Could something in the runtime path not be set up???

That was my original idea early today as well. My understanding of the UEFI spec is admittedly limited, but afaics calling runtime method from boot environment should be a valid thing to do ... ?

QueryVariableInfo() is a runtime services, all runtime services should available bother on boot time and runtime:

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

UEFI spec 2.3.1 P.109:
Runtime Services
Functions that are available before and after any call to ExitBootServices(). These functions are described in Section 7.

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

Unfortunately that means that you can as well throw the patch away completely.

The sole point is to run the QueryVariableInfo() from the boot environment, in order to obtain more accurate information. And it's a valid thing to do, according to UEFI specification.

Signature · 2 lines
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
#33 lore raw
Quoted 40 lines · Jiri Kosina
Quoted 29 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 29 lines
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 16 lines

Yes, but this call is clearly happening way before ExitBootServices() -- see the surrounding code, see for example this in efi_main():

[ ... snip ... ]

	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);

	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);

	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*gdt),
				(void **)&gdt);
	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
		efi_printk("Failed to alloc mem for gdt structure\n");
		goto fail;
	}

[ ... snip ... ]

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

Yes. Note the failing call is sys_table->runtime while all the other calls are sys_table->boottime and seem to work. Not sure why the sys_table->runtime call has a problem but it may be a clue. Could something in the runtime path not be set up???

That was my original idea early today as well. My understanding of the UEFI spec is admittedly limited, but afaics calling runtime method from boot environment should be a valid thing to do ... ?

QueryVariableInfo() is a runtime services, all runtime services should available bother on boot time and runtime:

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

UEFI spec 2.3.1 P.109:
Runtime Services
Functions that are available before and after any call to ExitBootServices(). These functions are described in Section 7.

That's a great idea. This patch moves the QueryVariableInfo() call from bootime to runtime, in efi_late_init(). The attached patch is consistent with the UEFI spec and avoids the problem.

Quoted 6 lines

Unfortunately that means that you can as well throw the patch away completely.

The sole point is to run the QueryVariableInfo() from the boot environment, in order to obtain more accurate information. And it's a valid thing to do, according to UEFI specification.

Argh!

The 'UEFI specification', if contradicted by reality, has _NO VALUE_ whatsoever. Full stop.

Any specification is only valuable as long as it's followed by everyone:
but once that is not the case, it does not matter much what the written wishes on the paper express.

What matters is that a system that booted fine with v3.8 does not boot anymore due to a change we did to the EFI code. And the only valid response to that is to make it work. Full stop!

And this is not only about SGI/UV systems: in this thread there were multiple systems mentioned that _DO NOT BOOT_ due to this change.

So this change needs to be reverted or fixed.

Thanks,

Ingo

#34 lore raw
Quoted 1 line · Ingo Molnar

So this change needs to be reverted or fixed.

I don't think anyone is arguing against that.

My remark was purely to describe the current status quo and help to understand what exactly is happening, i.e.:

- QueryVariableInfo() should be a valid thing to do from inside boot environment, according to the spec
- now we see that at least SGI bios (an probably other incarnations) think otherwise
- if we are not able to fix / work around the bug in BIOS (*), we have to make a choice between two evils -- either increase likelyhood of bricking certain machines due to filling the EFI storage space, or break booting on broken BIOSen
- the theory is that Borislav's 1:1 mapping patches will work this around; one of the supporting arguments being that it's probably what Windows is doing. I believe Borislav is in the process of testing this. But the patches are not ready for mainline yet.

(*) If one would be naive enough, he'd believe that the pressure should be
put on the BIOS writers instead of OS to fix the bug :)

Signature · 2 lines
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
#35 lore raw
Quoted 5 lines · Jiri Kosina
Quoted 3 lines · Ingo Molnar
Quoted 3 lines

Unfortunately that means that you can as well throw the patch away completely.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines

The sole point is to run the QueryVariableInfo() from the boot environment, in order to obtain more accurate information. And it's a valid thing to do, according to UEFI specification.

So this change needs to be reverted or fixed.

I don't think anyone is arguing against that.

The statement I replied to above can be fairly read as arguing against it.

Anyway, given that the fix (workaround) from Boris seems elaborate so late in the v3.10 cycle, does everyone else agree with a revert as well?

Thanks,

Ingo

#36 lore raw
Quoted 12 lines · Ingo Molnar
Quoted 9 lines · Jiri Kosina
Quoted 7 lines · Ingo Molnar
Quoted 6 lines

Unfortunately that means that you can as well throw the patch away completely.

The sole point is to run the QueryVariableInfo() from the boot environment, in order to obtain more accurate information. And it's a valid thing to do, according to UEFI specification.

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line

So this change needs to be reverted or fixed.

I don't think anyone is arguing against that.

The statement I replied to above can be fairly read as arguing against it.

Anyway, given that the fix (workaround) from Boris seems elaborate so late in the v3.10 cycle, does everyone else agree with a revert as well?

If you go with a revert, please make sure to tag it for stable to it gets picked up with 3.9.y.

josh

maintainer
#37 lore raw
In reply to Jiri Kosina
Quoted 2 lines · Jiri Kosina

(*) If one would be naive enough, he'd believe that the pressure should be put on the BIOS writers instead of OS to fix the bug :)

Oh, definitely pressure on BIOS dudes. If they're in violation of the spec and they still can fix it in time, they better. I'm sick and tired of having to deal with BIOS idiocy in kernel code.

#38 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · Borislav Petkov
Quoted 3 lines · Jiri Kosina

(*) If one would be naive enough, he'd believe that the pressure should be put on the BIOS writers instead of OS to fix the bug :)

Oh, definitely pressure on BIOS dudes. If they're in violation of the spec and they still can fix it in time, they better. I'm sick and tired of having to deal with BIOS idiocy in kernel code.

I'm all for some BIOS quality bashing, but the reality is:

1) It's not just about SGI/UV systems but apparently about several different types of x86 laptops produce the same boot crash pattern:
most of which come from manufacturers that simply don't care about Linux all that much.

So by not reverting we'd screw our users, not put any recognizable pressure on any BIOS writers or manufacturers.

2) Obviously Windows does not crash, and that's what most laptops test. So our realistic 'spec target' is not some sort of pure 'EFI spec', but EFI implementations _tested under Windows_. Consider it an 'extended EFI compatibility spec'.

3) There's a better, more robust firmware environment approach being worked on (by you?) that avoids such 1:1 physical mapping assumption crashes. That's something worth doing anyway, so why not delay the early QueryVariableInfo() call change to when that enviroment is properly implemented?

4) The revert is easy, and the functionality the original patch provided was a marginal increase in debug output to begin with...

So to me the right approach seems to be:

A: revert now for v3.10
B: implement 1:1 mappings environment for firmware, for v3.11
C: reintroduce the early QueryVariableInfo() call again, in v3.11

Thanks,

Ingo

#39 lore raw
Quoted 2 lines · Ingo Molnar

4) The revert is easy, and the functionality the original patch provided was a marginal increase in debug output to begin with...

I agree that a revert is probably the right thing to do here, but the original patch was there to permit a more accurate calculation of the amount of nvram in use, not to provide additional debug information. Reverting it is going to differently break a different set of systems

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#40 lore raw
Quoted 9 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 2 lines · Ingo Molnar

4) The revert is easy, and the functionality the original patch provided was a marginal increase in debug output to begin with...

I agree that a revert is probably the right thing to do here, but the original patch was there to permit a more accurate calculation of the amount of nvram in use, not to provide additional debug information. Reverting it is going to differently break a different set of systems

The only ones that are broken are the Samsung ones. Samsung claims to have fixed their UEFI firmware, so we could refer any problems to them.

The signature of the Samsung failure, which this is guarding against is that the laptop gets bricked, so it really is a nasty choice of poisons we have to pick...

Could we hedge the QueryVariableInfo checks with a test for Samsung in the UEFI identity strings?

James

#41 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · James Bottomley

The only ones that are broken are the Samsung ones. Samsung claims to have fixed their UEFI firmware, so we could refer any problems to them.

The signature of the Samsung failure, which this is guarding against is that the laptop gets bricked, so it really is a nasty choice of poisons we have to pick...

Are we sure it is only Samsung? I was under the impression there were other systems with similar failures?

-hpa

#42 lore raw
In reply to James Bottomley
Quoted 8 lines · James Bottomley
Quoted 4 lines · Matthew Garrett

I agree that a revert is probably the right thing to do here, but the original patch was there to permit a more accurate calculation of the amount of nvram in use, not to provide additional debug information. Reverting it is going to differently break a different set of systems

The only ones that are broken are the Samsung ones. Samsung claims to have fixed their UEFI firmware, so we could refer any problems to them.

No, reverting this gets us back to the old state of refusing any writes if more than 50% of the variable store *appears* to be used, regardless of whether it's actually used. Which, unfortunately, makes it impossible to install Linux on most UEFI machines. In any case, Samsung clearly haven't fixed this problem on a pile of machines that have already shipped.

Quoted 2 lines

Could we hedge the QueryVariableInfo checks with a test for Samsung in the UEFI identity strings?

We could, but apparently some Lenovos also have a similar problem. We just don't have the information we need to implement a comprehensive blacklist, and if we get it wrong we're back to destroying people's hardware.

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#43 lore raw
Quoted 7 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 6 lines · James Bottomley
Quoted 4 lines · Matthew Garrett

I agree that a revert is probably the right thing to do here, but the original patch was there to permit a more accurate calculation of the amount of nvram in use, not to provide additional debug information. Reverting it is going to differently break a different set of systems

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines

The only ones that are broken are the Samsung ones. Samsung claims to have fixed their UEFI firmware, so we could refer any problems to them.

No, reverting this gets us back to the old state of refusing any writes if more than 50% of the variable store *appears* to be used, regardless of whether it's actually used. Which, unfortunately, makes it impossible to install Linux on most UEFI machines.

When did writing EFI variables to nvram become necessary to boot on UEFI? And if it is necessary, why is it that only linux boot loaders that use EFI stubs (generally grub2) need it? The current kernel boots using EFI/grub and EFI/elilo. It is just when EFI stubs are used that the boot fails.

I'm missing the background on why linux needs to write so many EFI variables to nvram that it fills up nvram. What is that all about?

Quoted 3 lines

In any case, Samsung clearly
haven't fixed this problem on a pile of machines that have already shipped.

Which means the previous patch(es) that caused the bricking should get pulled, too.

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          [email protected]
#44 lore raw
Quoted 5 lines · Russ Anderson

When did writing EFI variables to nvram become necessary to boot on UEFI? And if it is necessary, why is it that only linux boot loaders that use EFI stubs (generally grub2) need it? The current kernel boots using EFI/grub and EFI/elilo. It is just when EFI stubs are used that the boot fails.

I think you've misunderstood the problem. If nvram becaomes full, some systems crash during firmware initialisation. So we can't let nvram become full. The obvious thing to do here is to look at the values from QueryVariableInfo, but many systems won't perform any garbage collection until they're almost out of space and so variables that have been deleted still show up as used space. We can work around that by adding up the size of the variables ourselves, but that only gives us the value for runtime-visible variables. We also need to know how much space is used by variables that are only visible during boot, hence calling QueryVariableInfo before ExitBootServices.

Quoted 2 lines

Which means the previous patch(es) that caused the bricking should get pulled, too.

There are no patches that cause the bricking.

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#45 lore raw
Quoted 19 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 5 lines · Russ Anderson

When did writing EFI variables to nvram become necessary to boot on UEFI? And if it is necessary, why is it that only linux boot loaders that use EFI stubs (generally grub2) need it? The current kernel boots using EFI/grub and EFI/elilo. It is just when EFI stubs are used that the boot fails.

I think you've misunderstood the problem. If nvram becaomes full, some systems crash during firmware initialisation. So we can't let nvram become full. The obvious thing to do here is to look at the values from QueryVariableInfo, but many systems won't perform any garbage collection until they're almost out of space and so variables that have been deleted still show up as used space. We can work around that by adding up the size of the variables ourselves, but that only gives us the value for runtime-visible variables. We also need to know how much space is used by variables that are only visible during boot, hence calling QueryVariableInfo before ExitBootServices.

Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Which means the previous patch(es) that caused the bricking should get pulled, too.

There are no patches that cause the bricking.

This is the description of the original problem:

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Booting-Linux-using-UEFI-can-brick-Samsung-laptops-1793958.html

And the further investigation:

http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/22855.html

If you read the latter, it shows you why we have to use QueryVariableInfo to try to work out how much space we have available.

James

#46 lore raw
In reply to Matthew Garrett
Quoted 9 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 5 lines · Russ Anderson

When did writing EFI variables to nvram become necessary to boot on UEFI? And if it is necessary, why is it that only linux boot loaders that use EFI stubs (generally grub2) need it? The current kernel boots using EFI/grub and EFI/elilo. It is just when EFI stubs are used that the boot fails.

I think you've misunderstood the problem.

The problem for me is the system not booting. I was not familiar with the problem you are trying to solve, but have now looked at the links.

Quoted 6 lines

If nvram becaomes full, some
systems crash during firmware initialisation. So we can't let nvram become full. The obvious thing to do here is to look at the values from QueryVariableInfo, but many systems won't perform any garbage collection until they're almost out of space and so variables that have been deleted still show up as used space.

OK. I get nvram looks full due to lack of garbage collection on some systems. Does QueryVariableInfo (at runtime) tell you it is full? Is the problem that it says it is full when it is not, or does not tell you it is full when it is?

Quoted 4 lines

We can work around that by adding
up the size of the variables ourselves, but that only gives us the value for runtime-visible variables. We also need to know how much space is used by variables that are only visible during boot,

Is it valid to assume that only the kernel writes to nvram at runtime? Can bios log error information to nvram on an SMM interrupt (for example)?

Quoted 2 lines

hence calling
QueryVariableInfo before ExitBootServices.

Correct me if I am wrong, but that is called from EFI stubs, which is only used by some bootloaders (sometimes grub2). Does that mean EFI/grub and EFI/elilo will not hit the problem, or will not have your fix?

Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Which means the previous patch(es) that caused the bricking should get pulled, too.

There are no patches that cause the bricking.

I thought that was the problem you were trying to avoid.

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#47 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines

Which means the previous patch(es) that caused the bricking should get pulled, too.

There are no patches that cause the bricking.

I thought that was the problem you were trying to avoid.

There are no *patches* that cause the bricking. We have been trying to figure out how to *avoid* the bricking.

-hpa

#48 lore raw
In reply to Russ Anderson
Quoted 4 lines · Russ Anderson

OK. I get nvram looks full due to lack of garbage collection on some systems. Does QueryVariableInfo (at runtime) tell you it is full? Is the problem that it says it is full when it is not, or does not tell you it is full when it is?

We are trying to count the size occupied by existing UEFI variables. QueryVariableInfo() called from runtime environment doesn't give a full picture, as it doesn't provide information about boot-only variables.

Hence the patch.

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines

up the size of the variables ourselves, but that only gives us the value for runtime-visible variables. We also need to know how much space is used by variables that are only visible during boot,

Is it valid to assume that only the kernel writes to nvram at runtime?

Well, mostly yes. But if the kernel doesn't know what the initial state is, it can't count the size properly.

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Which means the previous patch(es) that caused the bricking should get pulled, too.

There are no patches that cause the bricking.

I thought that was the problem you were trying to avoid.

The problem that needs to be avoided is machines turning into bricks if EFI storage nvram is getting full.

Signature · 2 lines
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
#49 lore raw
In reply to Russ Anderson
Quoted 8 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 6 lines · Matthew Garrett

If nvram becaomes full, some
systems crash during firmware initialisation. So we can't let nvram become full. The obvious thing to do here is to look at the values from QueryVariableInfo, but many systems won't perform any garbage collection until they're almost out of space and so variables that have been deleted still show up as used space.

Quoted 4 lines

OK. I get nvram looks full due to lack of garbage collection on some systems. Does QueryVariableInfo (at runtime) tell you it is full? Is the problem that it says it is full when it is not, or does not tell you it is full when it is?

QueryVariableInfo reports the amount used *including garbage*. This makes it useless for determining how much space is available for the firmware to use.

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

We can work around that by adding
up the size of the variables ourselves, but that only gives us the value for runtime-visible variables. We also need to know how much space is used by variables that are only visible during boot,

Is it valid to assume that only the kernel writes to nvram at runtime? Can bios log error information to nvram on an SMM interrupt (for example)?

There's a limited number of situations where the firmware can write to nvram, but they're basically uninteresting. Practically speaking, it's always via the kernel once ExitBootServices() has been called.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines

hence calling
QueryVariableInfo before ExitBootServices.

Correct me if I am wrong, but that is called from EFI stubs, which is only used by some bootloaders (sometimes grub2). Does that mean EFI/grub and EFI/elilo will not hit the problem, or will not have your fix?

Will not have the fix. Boot EFI systems via the EFI stub.

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#50 lore raw
Quoted 9 lines · Matthew Garrett
Quoted 8 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 6 lines · Matthew Garrett

If nvram becaomes full, some
systems crash during firmware initialisation. So we can't let nvram become full. The obvious thing to do here is to look at the values from QueryVariableInfo, but many systems won't perform any garbage collection until they're almost out of space and so variables that have been deleted still show up as used space.

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

OK. I get nvram looks full due to lack of garbage collection on some systems. Does QueryVariableInfo (at runtime) tell you it is full? Is the problem that it says it is full when it is not, or does not tell you it is full when it is?

QueryVariableInfo reports the amount used *including garbage*. This makes it useless for determining how much space is available for the firmware to use.

So when QueryVariableInfo reports there is space available, the write works and everything is fine.

And when QueryVariableInfo reports insufficient space, don't write and everything is fine.

But when QueryVariableInfo reports insufficient space and you write anyway, the system can get bricked. Is that the problem?

According to the UEFI spec for QueryVariableInfo()

RemainingVariableStorageSize
Returns the remaining size of the storage space available for EFI variables associated with the attributes specified.

It also says:

The returned MaximumVariableStorageSize, RemainingVariableStorageSize, MaximumVariableSize information may change immediately after the call based on other runtime activities including asynchronous error events. Also, these values associated with different attributes are not additive in nature.

Note that "other runtime activities including asynchronous error events." That means runtime services may be using nvram without the OS knowing about it.

Some bios implementation may be "*including garbage*", but can you definitively say ALL do? The spec explicitly says "the implementation of variable storage is not defined in this specification". You can't assume any form of garbage collection.

7.2 Variable Services

Although the implementation of variable storage is not defined in this specification, variables must be persistent in most cases. This implies that the EFI implementation on a platform must arrange it so that variables passed in for storage are retained and available for use each time the system boots, at least until they are explicitly deleted or overwritten. Provision of this type of nonvolatile storage may be very limited on some platforms, so variables should be used sparingly in cases where other means of communicating information cannot be used.

I don't see anything in here about the OS being free to use more nvram than QueryVariableInfo() reported as being available. What happened to following the spec?

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 4 lines

We can work around that by adding
up the size of the variables ourselves, but that only gives us the value for runtime-visible variables. We also need to know how much space is used by variables that are only visible during boot,

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines

Is it valid to assume that only the kernel writes to nvram at runtime? Can bios log error information to nvram on an SMM interrupt (for example)?

There's a limited number of situations where the firmware can write to nvram, but they're basically uninteresting. Practically speaking, it's always via the kernel once ExitBootServices() has been called.

How can you say "they're basically uninteresting"??? Do you know what EVERY bios implementation does???

Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines

hence calling
QueryVariableInfo before ExitBootServices.

Correct me if I am wrong, but that is called from EFI stubs, which is only used by some bootloaders (sometimes grub2). Does that mean EFI/grub and EFI/elilo will not hit the problem, or will not have your fix?

Will not have the fix. Boot EFI systems via the EFI stub.

Thanks for that clarification.

Quoted 1 line

Boot EFI systems via the EFI stub.

Fortunately all our shipping systems are EFI/grub and EFI/elilo right now, so they boot.

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#51 lore raw
Quoted 2 lines · Russ Anderson

And when QueryVariableInfo reports insufficient space, don't write and everything is fine.

And then installs fail, which is why we implemented this additional code.

Quoted 2 lines

But when QueryVariableInfo reports insufficient space and you write anyway, the system can get bricked. Is that the problem?

No.

Quoted 4 lines

Some bios implementation may be "*including garbage*", but can you definitively say ALL do? The spec explicitly says "the implementation of variable storage is not defined in this specification". You can't assume any form of garbage collection.

No. We can't assume that. But nor can we rely upon the spec, because behaving according to the spec results in dead computers. So we're forced to write code that behaves according to reality rather than paper, which is unfortunate, but if *your* firmware behaved according to the specification then you wouldn't be seeing any problems with the current code, so I think there's a lesson for us all here.

Quoted 3 lines

I don't see anything in here about the OS being free to use more nvram than QueryVariableInfo() reported as being available. What happened to following the spec?

That would be the same spec that tells you not to use physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap() has been called, right? Regardless, we don't use more space than QueryVariableInfo() reports as being available. We would expect that any attempt to do so would fail. But nor can we assume that we're free to use as much space as QueryVariableInfo() *does* report, because doing so results in dead computers. So instead we're forced to rely on workarounds that happen to break your broken firmware, so now we're going to have to find a different set of workarounds and hope that they don't break someone else's computer instead.

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines

There's a limited number of situations where the firmware can write to nvram, but they're basically uninteresting. Practically speaking, it's always via the kernel once ExitBootServices() has been called.

How can you say "they're basically uninteresting"??? Do you know what EVERY bios implementation does???

We have to assume that firmware doesn't behave in a pathological manner, because the alternative is to give up entirely and declare that Linux doesn't run on UEFI systems. I suspect that that would be problematic for your employers.

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#52 lore raw
In reply to Matthew Garrett
Quoted 5 lines · Matthew Garrett

I agree that a revert is probably the right thing to do here, but the original patch was there to permit a more accurate calculation of the amount of nvram in use, not to provide additional debug information. Reverting it is going to differently break a different set of systems

So "differently break" doesn't matter, if it's old breakage, and people thus don't really expect it to work. We need to fix bugs without *new* breakage, and quite frankly, I have been distressed by hearing the EFI "specifications" mentioned so many times in this thread.

Firmware specs are pure and utter garbage. They are irrelevant. Firmware is buggy, and will always be buggy. The "spec" doesn't matter. We should use firmware for loading the kernel, and as little else as humanly possible.

I'm very disappointed in how the EFI code doesn't seem to understand that. There's tons of these stupid EFI variable crap that simply shouldn't matter. Quite frankly, we'd be better off ignoring as much of it by default as at all possible. Exactly because the more of an EFI interface we have, the more we open us up to th einevitable firmware bugs.

Anyway, I'm traveling with absolutely horrendous internet access, so can somebody please send a description of the revert with the relevant information, because I literally have a hard time extracting it all from this thread because my email access is so slow and flaky... Make it easy for me to do the revert with a good explanation message, please,

Linus

#53 lore raw
Quoted 11 lines · Linus Torvalds
Quoted 5 lines · Matthew Garrett

I agree that a revert is probably the right thing to do here, but the original patch was there to permit a more accurate calculation of the amount of nvram in use, not to provide additional debug information. Reverting it is going to differently break a different set of systems

So "differently break" doesn't matter, if it's old breakage, and people thus don't really expect it to work. We need to fix bugs without *new* breakage, and quite frankly, I have been distressed by hearing the EFI "specifications" mentioned so many times in this thread.

The old breakage has only ever been present in -rcs, not in released kernels. We worked around the worst of it with the patchset that's causing the problems. We can avoid that old breakage by reverting the patches that introduced it, but that gets us back to bricking some machines.

Quoted 5 lines

Anyway, I'm traveling with absolutely horrendous internet access, so can somebody please send a description of the revert with the relevant information, because I literally have a hard time extracting it all from this thread because my email access is so slow and flaky... Make it easy for me to do the revert with a good explanation message, please,

I've finally got some information from Samsung that *should* let us fix this without anything else breaking in the process, but since we're dealing with firmware there's obviously a risk that that won't actually be true. I'll send that later today.

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
#54 lore raw
In reply to Russ Anderson

於 三,2013-05-29 於 17:46 -0500,Russ Anderson 提到:

Quoted 63 lines · Jiri Kosina
Quoted 60 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 36 lines
Quoted 18 lines

What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

The only reason I can see that the offending commit would introduce this problem is because it calls QueryVariableInfo() at boot time. I notice that your machine is an SGI UV one, is there any chance you could get a firmware fix for this? If possible, it would be also good to confirm that it's this chunk of code in setup_efi_vars(),

Quoted 5 lines
	status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
				EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
				EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
				EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
				&remaining_size, &var_size);

This does trigger the problem. Note that the definition of QueryVariableInfo() in the UEFI spec says:

The returned MaximumVariableStorageSize, RemainingVariableStorageSize, MaximumVariableSize information may change immediately after the call based on other runtime activities including asynchronous error events. Also, these values associated with different attributes are not additive in nature.

Note the values may be accurate at the point in time when returned, but may not be after that.

Quoted 7 lines

After the system has transitioned into runtime (after ExitBootServices() is called), an implementation may not be able to accurately return information about the Boot Services variable store. In such cases, EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER should be returned.

It is not clear to me exactly when ExitBootServices() is called. Our bios is returning a failing indication on the call.

Yes, but this call is clearly happening way before ExitBootServices() -- see the surrounding code, see for example this in efi_main():

[ ... snip ... ]

	setup_efi_vars(boot_params);

	setup_efi_pci(boot_params);

	status = efi_call_phys3(sys_table->boottime->allocate_pool,
				EFI_LOADER_DATA, sizeof(*gdt),
				(void **)&gdt);
	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
		efi_printk("Failed to alloc mem for gdt structure\n");
		goto fail;
	}
Quoted 1 line

[ ... snip ... ]

Quoted 5 lines

Yes. Note the failing call is sys_table->runtime while all the other calls are sys_table->boottime and seem to work. Not sure why the sys_table->runtime call has a problem but it may be a clue. Could something in the runtime path not be set up???

Per UEFI spec Section 6, all runtime services should a available both on boot time and runtime. And, we query the EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS space information before ExitBootServices(), that means we call it in boot time, so, QueryVariableInfo() should return information to us.

Back to the kernel oops, the oops happened in runtime environment when efivar_init running. As Matt's point out as following:

於 五,2013-05-24 於 08:43 +0100,Matt Fleming 提到:

Quoted 4 lines · Russ Anderson
Quoted 1 line
   efi: mem127: type=4, attr=0xf, range=[0x000000006bb22000-0x000000007ca9c000) (271MB)

EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE

Per UEFI 2.3.1 Section 6.2, type 4 is EfiBootServicesCode. This area available for OS using after ExitBootServices():

UEFI 2.3.1 P.133
EfiBootServicesData Memory available for general use.

So, any runtime services should not access this area, it's the first thing need to check the BIOS code for why.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
   efi: mem133: type=5, attr=0x800000000000000f, range=[0x000000007daff000-0x000000007dbff000) (1MB)

EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE

Quoted 3 lines
   EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
   BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
   IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f

[...]
What appears to be happening is that your the EFI runtime services code

Quoted 9 lines

is calling into the EFI boot services code, which is definitely a bug in your firmware because we're at runtime, but we've seen other machines that do similar things so we usually handle it just fine. However, what makes your case different, and the reason you see the above splat, is that it's using the physical address of the EFI boot services region, not the virtual one we setup with SetVirtualAddressMap(). Which is a second firmware bug. Again, we have seen other machines that access physical addresses after SetVirtualAddressMap(), but until now we haven't had any non-optional code that triggered them.

Actually, when efivars doing init, system is already in virtual mode not just runtime mode, that means OS already call SetVirtualAddressMap() to set the EfiBootServicesCode and EfiBootServicesData to virtual address.

As Matt's point out, the second things need to check is why does paging fault happen on physical address after SetVirtualAddressMap().

Currently, the only clue is we call QueryVariableInfo() in boottime for grab the space information of EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS, but it should permitted because it's in boot time:

於 五,2013-05-24 於 08:43 +0100,Matt Fleming 提到:

Quoted 5 lines
        status = efi_call_phys4(sys_table->runtime->query_variable_info,
                                EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE |
                                EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS |
                                EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS, &store_size,
                                &remaining_size, &var_size); 

Thanks a lot!
Joey Lee

#55 lore raw
In reply to Matt Fleming
Quoted 5 lines · Matt Fleming
Quoted 3 lines · Russ Anderson
[    6.062157] EFI Variables Facility v0.08 2004-May-17
[    6.067731] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000000007ca95b10
[    6.075519] IP: [<ffff88007dbf2140>] 0xffff88007dbf213f
Quoted 7 lines

This is a bit of a head scratcher. Could you paste the EFI memmap entries in your dmesg for the regions that cover 0x7ca95b10 and 0x7dbf2140? My guess would be that they're EFI runtime code regions, which would at least explain why we seem to be executing code in the direct mapping region (0xffff8800xxxxxxxx).

Are you booting via the EFI boot stub?

Interesting data point. The failure is on a rhel7/grub2 root. The identical kernel on a rhel6/grub root boots. So maybe grub2 brings out the failure? I suspect Fedora19/grub2 on EFI should hit the problem (for someone looking to reproduce it).

In both cases the kernel boot line options are the same.

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#56 lore raw
Quoted 7 lines · Russ Anderson

Interesting data point. The failure is on a rhel7/grub2 root. The identical kernel on a rhel6/grub root boots. So maybe grub2 brings out the failure? I suspect Fedora19/grub2 on EFI should hit the problem (for someone looking to reproduce it).

In both cases the kernel boot line options are the same.

I'll bet that rhel7 is using the EFI handover protocol which uses the internal mechanisms of the EFI boot stub.

I don't know whether anyone will be able to reproduce it, it looks like it's a bug that's specific to your firmware.

Signature · 1 line
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
#57 lore raw
Quoted 11 lines · Matt Fleming
Quoted 7 lines · Russ Anderson

Interesting data point. The failure is on a rhel7/grub2 root. The identical kernel on a rhel6/grub root boots. So maybe grub2 brings out the failure? I suspect Fedora19/grub2 on EFI should hit the problem (for someone looking to reproduce it).

In both cases the kernel boot line options are the same.

I'll bet that rhel7 is using the EFI handover protocol which uses the internal mechanisms of the EFI boot stub.

To be more specific (now that I've dug through the code), grub2 (used by rhel7) uses EFI boot stubs. grub and elilo apparently do not use EFI boot stubs, so they don't hit the problem (at least on my test systems).

Signature · 2 lines
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja-sJ/[email protected]
#58 lore raw
Quoted 6 lines · Russ Anderson

To be more specific (now that I've dug through the code), grub2 (used by rhel7) uses EFI boot stubs. grub and elilo apparently do not use EFI boot stubs, so they don't hit the problem (at least on my test systems).

Grub2 *can* use the EFI boot stub... as far as I know it doesn't by default, but the way it is used in RHEL does.

Either way, we need to fix this and fix it soon.

-hpa