Received: by 2002:a25:8b91:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp910433ybl; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 06:32:41 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxm87jioX4WqlZPSweihbuNP14Jn6e1dutqPzGAQaV+0EFIUVuMOn+k8A4/PBImdpijS7Le X-Received: by 2002:aca:d484:: with SMTP id l126mr6840576oig.114.1576247561224; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 06:32:41 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1576247561; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=UOF4EHB4QotnOSB1zn/+qtocPxLhfr208MAXx33WFQ8uQespUsBTakJlZGDgvaRz91 LKQCUfCEfDRH+XzbPeSUhcadkRNmEhMc6bJTorIL6WLrMYm6KH8IOsHkX+KMDCoRL9Jy AxxXybOzuYbcZgJuaEGBrGSsw6A3h7pCQvN5Pj7p/neJ6b/Uf8eVp2/hv4VSlOz3OvLP j8z1QV0NyuzDXLibEluPCAFA1x7b1MY/NDAAGEW/0+ivuP9S5XfsGmZyUHD3BeXnK81a BCtoxDgY+Il7TP45gsaAfqbEAwrL8NVU2/I3/54NkIt87FWlnFKZZw8qd24UNSkwF8aX 3RIg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject:dkim-signature; bh=ykZo3kG5ISYmLvjiMpJlkxot5ywM3Vp6sip1X77Jcyw=; b=01yp3FMiKHesnffR9ojlVNS2NYDdW+r49dCPWymisaFqqeW4LhVLasNgmEX9gxv7Ja Ohwb6SjHpzo2I6Fzh2HKobwZpbVgZHbBDo65JYhTQy7cIiswNQrFpC6Z6y1OF62B/OOO ZNKwJ3OhxrhgAyNBYgPX0F32SQO1woA5prh8l2I0XdoLxGLPUMlJ+4ITAwCszqBi24t2 Az/fFY1BbhKx5mbRqUmy8J4s6rObeJQj6TBUaFkfkFi6lGwJaEYORwI2Jx9iLH9w7aBA r/a+e/o2dlt1SSyjq0JJvnhnyf1Y55nakNSzYpOBebemlGyADVe5l32Nb3yLK+iZ2DvW 4sIg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=ZmvuOLY2; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p69si5247620oic.32.2019.12.13.06.32.27; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 06:32:41 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=ZmvuOLY2; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727686AbfLMObk (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 09:31:40 -0500 Received: from mail-qk1-f193.google.com ([209.85.222.193]:35670 "EHLO mail-qk1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725747AbfLMObk (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 09:31:40 -0500 Received: by mail-qk1-f193.google.com with SMTP id z76so2197182qka.2 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 06:31:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ykZo3kG5ISYmLvjiMpJlkxot5ywM3Vp6sip1X77Jcyw=; b=ZmvuOLY2OLj5gJEZSCS9MLSflO3nur5U4G0jfmS3Vi4JUEXPLq1mO1hniQJWD3i1MM UsEfpzKFKlfr1t2rfpsf0EOIEqQZWQji91CsYnjndbmkIkUNaXYbHcJrwVh/8jk+y+UK dESEyoWyxC3OKowZygAEzHIlHH8uj5ScAqkS3I40xzMZRW7d1mU2UtGI20G+752MgVEn +WWDbc2kP7cAmnZkD11zQ9oLwOfPQcm9cLTY2GMJMisxkvc0AfUzzDcMmraRIP4ZAzdU mBcf4MKtRdpyhmhUfgBuAcz1TbrshSGS63P+qTy3xlYE9Yp8qgcUqe9Nsai26KGMpJyL Iaog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ykZo3kG5ISYmLvjiMpJlkxot5ywM3Vp6sip1X77Jcyw=; b=mxAx3g8NMupZtb84ejFIUZSS/2OHhpj+XYEBwpsw+1Uwgz4G6N54+ffg3QK1HMk+sx 3N5+eSd5waGEavhy3i9T5sOOQj7r8QTLqg39iQCDKGBMYsdZW4UYl1SuoBqyCT+Cwohb /ULtq4aiT+cEwfWnFoROj6gyXPaQU2UAYKeprMz2eUHr7kP1FPaveXQOku/R++vEoyqj oaicPcii0begcwyP+TV0aArSZF2xFDaN0GyJkKHokT58Mtko06cN5smvft9IM9mcOEuV Rh1V+LxB5olJ9++jggNQGTW532lOWxouidApqJ5ySrzyD+2NooioUosFxOYqMH5VlR0h z6fw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXTqgy4lIAY4M0NO0zEDseAHIyeSEdjnz4NCH2v65Dj+ZO0L2xq HDt8ahhSEIXcLDwakxA3T/6EJOj8JUa4IQ== X-Received: by 2002:a37:274a:: with SMTP id n71mr11692954qkn.302.1576247498387; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 06:31:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (c-66-30-119-151.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [66.30.119.151]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v7sm3467318qtk.89.2019.12.13.06.31.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 06:31:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] iommu/vt-d bad RMRR workarounds To: Lu Baolu , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , David Woodhouse , Joerg Roedel , Yian Chen , Sohil Mehta Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20191211194606.87940-1-brho@google.com> <35f49464-0ce5-9998-12a0-624d9683ea18@linux.intel.com> From: Barret Rhoden Message-ID: <8a530d5c-22e1-3c2f-98df-45028cc6c771@google.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 09:31:36 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <35f49464-0ce5-9998-12a0-624d9683ea18@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/11/19 9:43 PM, Lu Baolu wrote: > The VT-d spec defines the BIOS considerations about RMRR in section 8.4: > > " > BIOS must report the RMRR reported memory addresses as reserved (or as > EFI runtime) in the system memory map returned through methods such as > INT15, EFI GetMemoryMap etc. > " > > So we should treat it as firmware bug if the RMRR range is not mapped as > RESERVED in the system memory map table. > > As for how should the driver handle this case, ignoring buggy RMRR with > a warning message might be a possible choice. Agreed, firmware should not be doing this. My first patch just skips those entries, instead of aborting DMAR processing, and keeps the warning. So long as the machine still boots in a safe manner, I'm reasonably happy. Thanks, Barret