On 7 November 2014 10:35, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 7 November 2014 10:26, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan....@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:03:55AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On 7 November 2014 09:46, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan....@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 09:23:56AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> >> On 7 November 2014 09:13, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan....@linux.intel.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 08:44:40AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> >> >> On 7 November 2014 08:37, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan....@linux.intel.com>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >> > On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 08:17:36AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> >> >> >> On 7 November 2014 06:47, LKP <l...@01.org> wrote:
>>> >> >> >> > FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> > https://git.linaro.org/people/ard.biesheuvel/linux-arm
>>> >> >> >> > efi-for-3.19
>>> >> >> >> > commit aacdce6e880894acb57d71dcb2e3fc61b4ed4e96 ("dmi: add
>>> >> >> >> > support for SMBIOS 3.0 64-bit entry point")
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> > +-----------------------+------------+------------+
>>> >> >> >> > | | 2fa165a26c | aacdce6e88 |
>>> >> >> >> > +-----------------------+------------+------------+
>>> >> >> >> > | boot_successes | 20 | 10 |
>>> >> >> >> > | early-boot-hang | 1 | |
>>> >> >> >> > | boot_failures | 0 | 5 |
>>> >> >> >> > | PANIC:early_exception | 0 | 5 |
>>> >> >> >> > +-----------------------+------------+------------+
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem
>>> >> >> >> > 0x0000000100000000-0x000000036fffffff] usable
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] bootconsole [earlyser0] enabled
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] NX (Execute Disable) protection: active
>>> >> >> >> > PANIC: early exception 0e rip 10:ffffffff81899e6b error 9 cr2
>>> >> >> >> > ffffffffff240000
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted
>>> >> >> >> > 3.18.0-rc2-gc5221e6 #1
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] 0000000000000000 ffffffff82203d30
>>> >> >> >> > ffffffff819f0a6e 00000000000003f8
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] ffffffffff240000 ffffffff82203e18
>>> >> >> >> > ffffffff823701b0 ffffffff82511401
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] 0000000000000000 0000000000000ba3
>>> >> >> >> > 0000000000000000 ffffffffff240000
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] Call Trace:
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff819f0a6e>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x68
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823701b0>] early_idt_handler+0x90/0xb7
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c80da>] ?
>>> >> >> >> > dmi_save_one_device+0x81/0x81
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff81899e6b>] ? dmi_table+0x3f/0x94
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff81899e42>] ? dmi_table+0x16/0x94
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c80da>] ?
>>> >> >> >> > dmi_save_one_device+0x81/0x81
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c80da>] ?
>>> >> >> >> > dmi_save_one_device+0x81/0x81
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c7eff>] dmi_walk_early+0x44/0x69
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c88a2>] dmi_present+0x180/0x1ff
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c8ab3>] dmi_scan_machine+0x144/0x191
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff82370702>] ? loglevel+0x31/0x31
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff82377f52>] setup_arch+0x490/0xc73
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff819eef73>] ? printk+0x4d/0x4f
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff82370b90>] start_kernel+0x9c/0x43f
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff82370120>] ?
>>> >> >> >> > early_idt_handlers+0x120/0x120
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823704a2>]
>>> >> >> >> > x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823705df>]
>>> >> >> >> > x86_64_start_kernel+0x13b/0x14a
>>> >> >> >> > [ 0.000000] RIP 0x4
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> This is most puzzling. Could anyone decode the exception?
>>> >> >> >> This looks like the non-EFI path through dmi_scan_machine(), which
>>> >> >> >> calls dmi_present() /after/ calling dmi_smbios3_present(), which
>>> >> >> >> apparently has not found the _SM3_ header tag. Or could the call
>>> >> >> >> stack
>>> >> >> >> be inaccurate?
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> Anyway, it would be good to know the exact type of the platform,
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > It's a Nehalem-EP machine, wht 16 CPU and 12G memory.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> and
>>> >> >> >> perhaps we could find out if there is an inadvertent _SM3_ tag
>>> >> >> >> somewhere in the 0xF0000 - 0xFFFFF range?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Sorry, how?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> That's not a brand new machine, so I suppose there wouldn't be a
>>> >> >> SMBIOS 3.0 header lurking in there.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Anyway, if you are in a position to try things, could you apply this
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --- a/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c
>>> >> >> +++ b/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c
>>> >> >> @@ -617,7 +617,7 @@ void __init dmi_scan_machine(void)
>>> >> >> memset(buf, 0, 16);
>>> >> >> for (q = p; q < p + 0x10000; q += 16) {
>>> >> >> memcpy_fromio(buf + 16, q, 16);
>>> >> >> - if (!dmi_smbios3_present(buf) ||
>>> >> >> !dmi_present(buf)) {
>>> >> >> + if (!dmi_present(buf)) {
>>> >> >> dmi_available = 1;
>>> >> >> dmi_early_unmap(p, 0x10000);
>>> >> >> goto out;
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> and try again?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > kernel boots perfectly with this patch applied.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --yliu
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Thank you! Very useful to know
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Sigh, I made a silly error, I speicified wrong commit while testing your
>>> > patch. Sorry for that.
>>> >
>>> > And I tested it again, with your former patch, sorry, the panic still
>>> > happens.
>>> >
>>> > --yliu
>>> >
>>>
>>> OK, no worries.
>>>
>>> Could you please try the attached patch? On my ARM system, it produces
>>> something like this
>>>
>>> ====== Decoding _DMI_ header:
>>> 5f 44 4d 49 5f 89 62 02 00 c0 8a fe 0c 00 27 cf
>>> ====== Remapped SMBIOS table 0xfe8ac000 at ffffff800001e000, size 0x262,
>>> num 0xc
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e000, type 0x0, length
>>> 0x18
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e043, type 0x1, length
>>> 0x1b
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e09d, type 0x2, length
>>> 0x11
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e105, type 0x3, length
>>> 0x18
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e155, type 0x4, length
>>> 0x2a
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e19a, type 0x7, length
>>> 0x13
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e1b5, type 0x9, length
>>> 0x11
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e1cf, type 0x10, length
>>> 0x17
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e1e8, type 0x11, length
>>> 0x28
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e22e, type 0x13, length
>>> 0x1f
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e24f, type 0x20, length
>>> 0xb
>>> ====== Processing SMBIOS table entry at ffffff800001e25c, type 0x7f, length
>>> 0x4
>>> SMBIOS 2.7 present.
>>> DMI: ARM Arm Versatile Express/Arm Versatile Express, BIOS 16:20:46 Oct 28
>>> 2014
>>>
>>> That should help us pinpoint what is going on here.
>>>
>>
>> Here is the output:
>>
>> [ 0.000000] NX (Execute Disable) protection: active
>> [ 0.000000] ====== Decoding _DMI_ header:
>> [ 0.000000] 5f 44 4d 49 5f 48 a3 0b 00 20 60 8f 3e 00 25 00
>> [ 0.000000] ====== Remapped SMBIOS table 0xffffffff8f602000 at
>> ffffffffff240000, size 0xba3, num 0x3e
>
> OK, so that looks like more type promotion silliness.
>
> Could you apply this, and retry?
>
(I hit 'send' by accident)
--- a/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c
@@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ static int __init dmi_present(const u8 *buf)
if (memcmp(buf, "_DMI_", 5) == 0 && dmi_checksum(buf, 15)) {
dmi_num = get_unaligned_le16(buf + 12);
dmi_len = get_unaligned_le16(buf + 6);
- dmi_base = get_unaligned_le32(buf + 8);
+ dmi_base = (u32)get_unaligned_le32(buf + 8);
if (dmi_walk_early(dmi_decode) == 0) {
if (smbios_ver) {
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
