Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755969Ab3GOU27 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:28:59 -0400 Received: from mail-vb0-f49.google.com ([209.85.212.49]:57061 "EHLO mail-vb0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755498Ab3GOU25 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:28:57 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 13:28:36 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: BGRT Pointer in System RAM To: Parag Warudkar Cc: LKML , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, josh@joshtriplett.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2896 Lines: 63 On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Parag Warudkar wrote: > Saw this warning running latest git (Ubuntu daily mainline.) It looked > similar to what Andy saw on MSI hardware - > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-acpi/msg43410.html . The patch for > it doesn't seem to be merged, although it won't help in my case - > different hardware with valid status instead of invalid and image > address falling in system RAM instead of just being wild. > > Unsure how this should be handled - moving the is_ram() check in > efi_bgrt_init and ignoring the BGRT in case where the check succeeds? > Doesn't sound completely right to me - since the BGRT is valid and > exists somewhere, but.. > > [ 0.015141] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 0.015147] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at > /home/apw/COD/linux/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c:102 > __ioremap_caller+0x312/0x390() > [ snip ] > [ 0.015160] Call Trace: > [ 0.015165] [] dump_stack+0x46/0x58 > [ 0.015169] [] warn_slowpath_common+0x8c/0xc0 > [ 0.015171] [] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20 > [ 0.015173] [] __ioremap_caller+0x312/0x390 > [ 0.015176] [] ? acpi_tb_verify_table+0x54/0x58 > [ 0.015179] [] ? efi_bgrt_init+0x8f/0x143 > [ 0.015181] [] ioremap_nocache+0x17/0x20 > [ 0.015183] [] efi_bgrt_init+0x8f/0x143 > [ 0.015186] [] ? acpi_tb_initialize_facs+0x32/0x34 > [ 0.015188] [] efi_late_init+0x9/0xb > [ 0.015190] [] start_kernel+0x3fd/0x419 > [ 0.015192] [] ? do_early_param+0x87/0x87 > [ 0.015194] [] ? early_idt_handlers+0x120/0x120 > [ 0.015196] [] x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c > > ioremap.c:102 > /* > * Don't allow anybody to remap normal RAM that we're using.. > */ > last_pfn = last_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT; > for (pfn = phys_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT; pfn <= last_pfn; pfn++) { > int is_ram = page_is_ram(pfn); > > if (is_ram && pfn_valid(pfn) && !PageReserved(pfn_to_page(pfn))) > return NULL; > WARN_ON_ONCE(is_ram); > } > > Looking at the BGRT table from IASL, the status seems to be valid but > the image address *seems* to me that is falling under system RAM. Interesting. My BGRT says: [028h 0040 8] Image Address : 0D06801800000001 If I reverse the high and low 32-bit dwords, then I get an address in system RAM. --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/