setup_e820() is executed after UEFI's ExitBootService has been called.
This causes the firmware to throw an exception because Console IO
protocol handler is supposed to work only during boot service
environment. As per UEFI 2.9, section 12.1:
"This protocol isused to handle input and output of text-based
information intended for the system user during the operation of code
in the boot services environment."
Running a TDX guest with TDVF with unaccepted memory disabled results in
the following output:
!!!! X64 Exception Type - 06(#UD - Invalid Opcode) CPU Apic ID - 00000000 !!!!
RIP - 0000000000603D51, CS - 0000000000000038, RFLAGS - 0000000000010046
RAX - 0000000000000000, RCX - 0000000000000000, RDX - 000000007EC27530
RBX - 0000000001C227A1, RSP - 000000007EC274D8, RBP - 000000007EC27530
RSI - 000000000000000A, RDI - 000000007EC27530
R8 - 00000000AC1C4720, R9 - 000000007D2C5F18, R10 - 0000000000400000
R11 - 0000000000000000, R12 - 0000000001C22B0E, R13 - 0000000000000000
R14 - 0000000000000032, R15 - 000000007C6022D0
DS - 0000000000000030, ES - 0000000000000030, FS - 0000000000000030
GS - 0000000000000030, SS - 0000000000000030
CR0 - 0000000080010031, CR2 - 0000000000000000, CR3 - 000000007EA01000
CR4 - 0000000000000268, CR8 - 0000000000000000
DR0 - 0000000000000000, DR1 - 0000000000000000, DR2 - 0000000000000000
DR3 - 0000000000000000, DR6 - 00000000FFFF0FF0, DR7 - 0000000000000400
GDTR - 000000007E7E6000 0000000000000047, LDTR - 0000000000000000
IDTR - 000000007D2BD018 0000000000000FFF, TR - 0000000000000000
FXSAVE_STATE - 000000007EC27130
!!!! Can't find image information. !!!!
Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <[email protected]>
---
drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c | 5 +----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c
index 2fee52ed335d..3b8bccd7c216 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c
@@ -605,11 +605,8 @@ setup_e820(struct boot_params *params, struct setup_data *e820ext, u32 e820ext_s
break;
case EFI_UNACCEPTED_MEMORY:
- if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNACCEPTED_MEMORY)) {
- efi_warn_once(
-"The system has unaccepted memory, but kernel does not support it\nConsider enabling CONFIG_UNACCEPTED_MEMORY\n");
+ if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNACCEPTED_MEMORY))
continue;
- }
e820_type = E820_TYPE_RAM;
process_unaccepted_memory(d->phys_addr,
d->phys_addr + PAGE_SIZE * d->num_pages);
--
2.34.1
On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:25:28PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> setup_e820() is executed after UEFI's ExitBootService has been called.
> This causes the firmware to throw an exception because Console IO
> protocol handler is supposed to work only during boot service
> environment. As per UEFI 2.9, section 12.1:
>
> "This protocol isused to handle input and output of text-based
> information intended for the system user during the operation of code
> in the boot services environment."
>
> Running a TDX guest with TDVF with unaccepted memory disabled results in
> the following output:
Oh. My bad.
But there's other codepath that does the same. If setup_e820() fails with
EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL, efi_stub_entry() would try to print "exit_boot()
failed\n".
I wouldner if it is feasible to hook up earlyprintk console into
efi_printk() machinery for after ExitBootService() case? Silent boot
failure is not the best UX.
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
On 12.10.23 г. 13:14 ч., [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:25:28PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> setup_e820() is executed after UEFI's ExitBootService has been called.
>> This causes the firmware to throw an exception because Console IO
>> protocol handler is supposed to work only during boot service
>> environment. As per UEFI 2.9, section 12.1:
>>
>> "This protocol isused to handle input and output of text-based
>> information intended for the system user during the operation of code
>> in the boot services environment."
>>
>> Running a TDX guest with TDVF with unaccepted memory disabled results in
>> the following output:
>
> Oh. My bad.
>
> But there's other codepath that does the same. If setup_e820() fails with
> EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL, efi_stub_entry() would try to print "exit_boot()
> failed\n".
>
> I wouldner if it is feasible to hook up earlyprintk console into
> efi_printk() machinery for after ExitBootService() case? Silent boot
> failure is not the best UX.
>
In my testing I was able to transpose setup_e820 and efi
exit_boot_service by calling exit_boot_func before setup_e820 which
ensures the various memory variables are populated. Is there any
specific reason why ExitBootServices is called before setting up the
e820 table? AFAIU this is an arbitrary choice?
On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 01:51:13PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 12.10.23 г. 13:14 ч., [email protected] wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:25:28PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> > > setup_e820() is executed after UEFI's ExitBootService has been called.
> > > This causes the firmware to throw an exception because Console IO
> > > protocol handler is supposed to work only during boot service
> > > environment. As per UEFI 2.9, section 12.1:
> > >
> > > "This protocol isused to handle input and output of text-based
> > > information intended for the system user during the operation of code
> > > in the boot services environment."
> > >
> > > Running a TDX guest with TDVF with unaccepted memory disabled results in
> > > the following output:
> >
> > Oh. My bad.
> >
> > But there's other codepath that does the same. If setup_e820() fails with
> > EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL, efi_stub_entry() would try to print "exit_boot()
> > failed\n".
> >
> > I wouldner if it is feasible to hook up earlyprintk console into
> > efi_printk() machinery for after ExitBootService() case? Silent boot
> > failure is not the best UX.
> >
>
>
> In my testing I was able to transpose setup_e820 and efi exit_boot_service
> by calling exit_boot_func before setup_e820 which ensures the various memory
> variables are populated. Is there any specific reason why ExitBootServices
> is called before setting up the e820 table? AFAIU this is an arbitrary
> choice?
Because if you allocate memory with EFI service it can alter EFI memory
map and we need the last version to convert it to e820.
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 at 13:25, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 01:51:13PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 12.10.23 г. 13:14 ч., [email protected] wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:25:28PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> > > > setup_e820() is executed after UEFI's ExitBootService has been called.
> > > > This causes the firmware to throw an exception because Console IO
> > > > protocol handler is supposed to work only during boot service
> > > > environment. As per UEFI 2.9, section 12.1:
> > > >
> > > > "This protocol isused to handle input and output of text-based
> > > > information intended for the system user during the operation of code
> > > > in the boot services environment."
> > > >
> > > > Running a TDX guest with TDVF with unaccepted memory disabled results in
> > > > the following output:
> > >
> > > Oh. My bad.
> > >
> > > But there's other codepath that does the same. If setup_e820() fails with
> > > EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL, efi_stub_entry() would try to print "exit_boot()
> > > failed\n".
> > >
> > > I wouldner if it is feasible to hook up earlyprintk console into
> > > efi_printk() machinery for after ExitBootService() case? Silent boot
> > > failure is not the best UX.
> > >
> >
> >
> > In my testing I was able to transpose setup_e820 and efi exit_boot_service
> > by calling exit_boot_func before setup_e820 which ensures the various memory
> > variables are populated. Is there any specific reason why ExitBootServices
> > is called before setting up the e820 table? AFAIU this is an arbitrary
> > choice?
>
> Because if you allocate memory with EFI service it can alter EFI memory
> map and we need the last version to convert it to e820.
>
Indeed, and note that the memory map may change due to asynchronous
events, which only get shut down when ExitBootServices() is called.
This is the reason for this complicated dance around
ExitBootServices() with the callback etc
On 12.10.23 г. 13:14 ч., [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:25:28PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> setup_e820() is executed after UEFI's ExitBootService has been called.
>> This causes the firmware to throw an exception because Console IO
>> protocol handler is supposed to work only during boot service
>> environment. As per UEFI 2.9, section 12.1:
>>
>> "This protocol isused to handle input and output of text-based
>> information intended for the system user during the operation of code
>> in the boot services environment."
>>
>> Running a TDX guest with TDVF with unaccepted memory disabled results in
>> the following output:
>
> Oh. My bad.
>
> But there's other codepath that does the same. If setup_e820() fails with
> EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL, efi_stub_entry() would try to print "exit_boot()
> failed\n".
>
> I wouldner if it is feasible to hook up earlyprintk console into
> efi_printk() machinery for after ExitBootService() case? Silent boot
> failure is not the best UX.
>
So looking at the code the only thing which would prevent refactoring to
exit logic to directly call exit_boot_func etc and setup_e820 before
calling efi_exit_boot_services is if the memory map changes. The current
code ensures that we really have the latest memory map version and so
setup_e820 is called with the latest version.
Ard, how likely it is that the memory map can indeed change between the
calls to getmemorymap and exitbootservice?
(cc Matthew)
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 at 13:28, Nikolay Borisov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12.10.23 г. 13:14 ч., [email protected] wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:25:28PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> >> setup_e820() is executed after UEFI's ExitBootService has been called.
> >> This causes the firmware to throw an exception because Console IO
> >> protocol handler is supposed to work only during boot service
> >> environment. As per UEFI 2.9, section 12.1:
> >>
> >> "This protocol isused to handle input and output of text-based
> >> information intended for the system user during the operation of code
> >> in the boot services environment."
> >>
> >> Running a TDX guest with TDVF with unaccepted memory disabled results in
> >> the following output:
> >
> > Oh. My bad.
> >
> > But there's other codepath that does the same. If setup_e820() fails with
> > EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL, efi_stub_entry() would try to print "exit_boot()
> > failed\n".
> >
> > I wouldner if it is feasible to hook up earlyprintk console into
> > efi_printk() machinery for after ExitBootService() case? Silent boot
> > failure is not the best UX.
> >
>
> So looking at the code the only thing which would prevent refactoring to
> exit logic to directly call exit_boot_func etc and setup_e820 before
> calling efi_exit_boot_services is if the memory map changes. The current
> code ensures that we really have the latest memory map version and so
> setup_e820 is called with the latest version.
>
> Ard, how likely it is that the memory map can indeed change between the
> calls to getmemorymap and exitbootservice?
Very likely. Matthew mentioned this to me not too long ago, i.e., that
on real-world platforms, ExitBootServices() typically fails the first
time because of this, and only succeeds the second time (note that the
first call disables async event delivery so the second call is
guaranteed to succeed unless the caller modifies the memory map
themselves)
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 at 12:15, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:25:28PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> > setup_e820() is executed after UEFI's ExitBootService has been called.
> > This causes the firmware to throw an exception because Console IO
> > protocol handler is supposed to work only during boot service
> > environment. As per UEFI 2.9, section 12.1:
> >
> > "This protocol isused to handle input and output of text-based
> > information intended for the system user during the operation of code
> > in the boot services environment."
> >
Thanks. I've queued this up as a fix.
> > Running a TDX guest with TDVF with unaccepted memory disabled results in
> > the following output:
>
> Oh. My bad.
>
> But there's other codepath that does the same. If setup_e820() fails with
> EFI_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL, efi_stub_entry() would try to print "exit_boot()
> failed\n".
>
> I wouldner if it is feasible to hook up earlyprintk console into
> efi_printk() machinery for after ExitBootService() case? Silent boot
> failure is not the best UX.
>
I don't disagree with that in principle, but wiring this up seems
non-trivial, and will be x86-only.
The EFI output is not recorded in the kernel log, and this particular
issue is something we can warn about later on, when it is much more
likely that someone will notice.
So if we want to keep this functionality, I'd prefer it if we could
add something to the generic EFI memmap code that warns_once about
unaccepted memory being present and CONFIG_UNACCEPTED_MEMORY being
disabled.