Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 2 Mar 2021 11:57:08 +0200
From:   Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
To:     George Kennedy <george.kennedy@oracle.com>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@darnok.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
        Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
        Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@arm.com>,
        Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@oracle.com>, robert.moore@intel.com,
        erik.kaneda@intel.com, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, lenb@kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, kasan: don't poison boot memory
Message-ID: <YD4L9DCpsFWhjSlJ@linux.ibm.com>
References: <20210225145700.GC1854360@linux.ibm.com>
 <bb444ddb-d60d-114f-c2fe-64e5fb34102d@oracle.com>
 <20210225160706.GD1854360@linux.ibm.com>
 <6000e7fd-bf8b-b9b0-066d-23661da8a51d@oracle.com>
 <dc5e007c-9223-b03b-1c58-28d2712ec352@oracle.com>
 <20210226111730.GL1854360@linux.ibm.com>
 <e9e2f1a3-80f2-1b3e-6ffd-8004fe41c485@oracle.com>
 <YDvcH7IY8hV4u2Zh@linux.ibm.com>
 <083c2bfd-12dd-f3c3-5004-fb1e3fb6493c@oracle.com>
 <a8864397-83e8-61f7-4b9a-33716eca6cf8@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <a8864397-83e8-61f7-4b9a-33716eca6cf8@oracle.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi George,

On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 08:20:45PM -0500, George Kennedy wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > There should be no harm in doing the memblock_reserve() for all
> > > > the standard
> > > > tables, right?
> > > It should be ok to memblock_reserve() all the tables very early as
> > > long as
> > > we don't run out of static entries in memblock.reserved.
> > > 
> > > We just need to make sure the tables are reserved before memblock
> > > allocations are possible, so we'd still need to move
> > > acpi_table_init() in
> > > x86::setup_arch() before e820__memblock_setup().
> > > Not sure how early ACPI is initialized on arm64.
> > 
> > Thanks Mike. Will try to move the memblock_reserves() before
> > e820__memblock_setup().
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> Moved acpi_table_init() in x86::setup_arch() before e820__memblock_setup()
> as you suggested.
> 
> Ran 10 boots with the following without error.

I'd suggest to send it as a formal patch to see what x86 and ACPI folks
have to say about this.
 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> index 740f3bdb..3b1dd24 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -1047,6 +1047,7 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> ???? cleanup_highmap();
> 
> ???? memblock_set_current_limit(ISA_END_ADDRESS);
> +??? acpi_boot_table_init();
> ???? e820__memblock_setup();
> 
> ???? /*
> @@ -1140,8 +1141,6 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> ???? /*
> ???? ?* Parse the ACPI tables for possible boot-time SMP configuration.
> ???? ?*/
> -??? acpi_boot_table_init();
> -
> ???? early_acpi_boot_init();
> 
> ???? initmem_init();
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbinstal.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbinstal.c
> index 0bb15ad..7830109 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbinstal.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbinstal.c
> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
> ? *
> *****************************************************************************/
> 
> +#include <linux/memblock.h>
> ?#include <acpi/acpi.h>
> ?#include "accommon.h"
> ?#include "actables.h"
> @@ -16,6 +17,33 @@
> 
> ?/*******************************************************************************
> ? *
> + * FUNCTION:??? acpi_tb_reserve_standard_table
> + *
> + * PARAMETERS:? address???????????? - Table physical address
> + *????????????? header????????????? - Table header
> + *
> + * RETURN:????? None
> + *
> + * DESCRIPTION: To avoid an acpi table page from being "stolen" by the
> buddy
> + *????????????? allocator run memblock_reserve() on all the standard acpi
> tables.
> + *
> + ******************************************************************************/
> +void
> +acpi_tb_reserve_standard_table(acpi_physical_address address,
> +??? ??? ??? ?? struct acpi_table_header *header)
> +{
> +??? if ((ACPI_COMPARE_NAMESEG(header->signature, ACPI_SIG_FACS)) ||
> +??? ??? (ACPI_VALIDATE_RSDP_SIG(header->signature)))
> +??? ??? return;
> +

Why these should be excluded?

> +??? if (header->length > PAGE_SIZE) /* same check as in acpi_map() */
> +??? ??? return;

I don't think this is required, I believe acpi_map() has this check because
kmap() cannot handle multiple pages.

> +
> +??? memblock_reserve(address, PAGE_ALIGN(header->length));
> +}
> +
> +/*******************************************************************************
> + *
> ? * FUNCTION:??? acpi_tb_install_table_with_override
> ? *
> ? * PARAMETERS:? new_table_desc????????? - New table descriptor to install
> @@ -58,6 +86,9 @@
> ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? new_table_desc->flags,
> ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? new_table_desc->pointer);
> 
> +??? acpi_tb_reserve_standard_table(new_table_desc->address,
> +??? ??? ??? ??? ?? new_table_desc->pointer);
> +
> ???? acpi_tb_print_table_header(new_table_desc->address,
> ???? ??? ??? ??? ?? new_table_desc->pointer);
> 
> George

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.