Date:   Fri, 3 Mar 2023 11:10:22 +0200
From:   Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [tip: x86/urgent] x86/setup: Always reserve the first 1M of RAM
Message-ID: <ZAG5fvRl4Z+3vGfS@linux.ibm.com>
References: <20210601075354.5149-2-rppt@kernel.org>
 <162274330352.29796.17521974349959809425.tip-bot2@tip-bot2>
 <7d344756-aec4-4df2-9427-da742ef9ce6b@app.fastmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7d344756-aec4-4df2-9427-da742ef9ce6b@app.fastmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Andy,

On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 07:51:43PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2021, at 11:01 AM, tip-bot2 for Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >
> > x86/setup: Always reserve the first 1M of RAM
> >

...

> +       /*
> +        * Unconditionally reserve the entire fisrt 1M, see comment in
> +        * setup_arch().
> +        */
> +       memblock_reserve(0, SZ_1M);
> 
> 
> But this runs even if we just failed to allocate a trampoline on the
> first try, again dooming the kernel to panic.
> 
> I real the commit message and the linked bug, and I'm having trouble
> finding evidence of anything actually fixed by this patch.  Can we just
> revert it?  If not, it would be nice to get a fixup patch that genuinely
> cleans this up -- the whole structure of the code (first, try to allocate
> trampoline, then free boot services, then try again) isn't really
> conducive to a model where we *don't* free boot services < 1M.
 
Currently, the second attempt to set_real_mode_mem() in
efi_free_boot_services() does not allocate from memblock anyway but reuses
memory freed from EFI services. Could be that failure to boot caused by
another failing reservation?
 
> Discovered by my delightful laptop, which does not boot with this patch applied.

Do you have early_printk() visible? 
 
> --Andy

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.