[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [V10 PATCH 0/4] pvh dom0 patches...

On 03/05/14 02:01, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> On Fri, 2 May 2014 13:05:23 +0200
> Roger Pau Monnà <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 01/05/14 03:19, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:12:16 -0700
>>> Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:11:39 +0200
>>>> Roger Pau Monnà <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> On 30/04/14 03:06, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
>>>> .....
>>>>> Hello Mukesh,
>>>>> Thanks for the new version, unfortunately when trying to boot
>>>>> FreeBSD Dom0 with this version I get the following hypervisor
>>>>> crash (it works fine with previous versions):
>>>> Aha, Jan, there's the vioapic crash!! Roger, see:
>>>> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/xen/devel/325784
>>>> I had seen this few weeks ago, but could not reproduce last week 
>>>> despite several attempts. You are seeing this in V10 because I
>>>> dropped the vioapic patch from V9 (included below).
>>>> BTW, since I'm not able to reproduce this, can you kindly check
>>>> where the ept violation is coming from? Is that on an io space?
>>>> Also, our binaries don't match, so can you please confirm it's the 
>>>> call from:
>>>> hvm_hap_nested_page_fault():
>>>>     if ( (p2mt == p2m_mmio_dm) ||
>>>>          (access_w && (p2mt == p2m_ram_ro)) )
>>>>     {
>>>>         put_gfn(p2m->domain, gfn);
>>>>         if ( !handle_mmio() )   <==========
>>>>             hvm_inject_hw_exception(TRAP_gp_fault, 0);
>>>> In which case, what's the p2mt?
>>> Hey Roger,
>>> I tried few things, but still could not reproduce. I saw it few
>>> weeks ago, and I think I misread the code thinking
>>> hvm_hap_nested_page_fault was calling handle_mmio unconditionally,
>>> and quickly came up with the vioapic patch for v9. 
>>> So, can you please try with the vioapic patch. Then two things will
>>> happen:
>>>   1. The ept violation is genuine, in which case it will return back
>>>      successfully to ept_handle_violation which will print the
>>> gfn/mfn info for further debug.
>>>   2. the emulation will be handled, in which case we need to know
>>> what was it, mmio_dm or ram_ro, and where it came from in dom0?
>>> Both are unexpected.
>> With the patch applied I can boot fine, no error messages at all. I've
>> printed the address that's causing the vioapic_range call, it's
>> 0x1073741824, which according to the e820 map passed by Xen falls
>> into a region marked as valid memory:
>> SMAP type=01 base=0000000000100000 len=000000003ff6e000
>> The crash happens because FreeBSD scrubs all valid memory at early
>> boot when booted with hw.memtest.tests=1.
> Hi Roger,

Hello Mukesh, thanks for the help.

> I think something else is going on here. 
> The vioapic address check is fenced by is_hvm check, 
>     if ( !nestedhvm_vcpu_in_guestmode(v)
>          && is_hvm_vcpu(v)    <====
>          && gfn == PFN_DOWN(vlapic_base_address(vcpu_vlapic(v))) )
>     {

AFAIK this is not the path that's causing the fault, the fault comes from:

    if ( (p2mt == p2m_mmio_dm) ||
         (access_w && (p2mt == p2m_ram_ro)) )
        put_gfn(p2m->domain, gfn);
        if ( !handle_mmio() ) <=====
            hvm_inject_hw_exception(TRAP_gp_fault, 0);
        rc = 1;
        goto out;

This was happening because I was trying to access a gpfn from outside of
the p2m map, which didn't have a valid mfn. The type of the page was
p2m_mmio_dm, the access p2m_access_n and the mfn was not valid (I've
done a p2m->get_entry on the faulting address).

This was because I was using start_info->nr_pages as the number of
usable RAM pages, but AFAICT from the code in domain_build.c,
pvh_map_all_iomem is making holes in the p2m, but it is not adding those
freed pages back to the end of the memory map, so the value in nr_pages
is not the number of usable RAM pages, but the number of pages in the
p2m map (taking into account both usable RAM pages and p2m_mmio_direct

I'm not sure if this logic is correct, shouldn't the freed pages by
pvh_map_all_iomem be added to the end of the memory map?

I will try with the attached patch, but this means I will have to revert
to my previous broken logic in FreeBSD.


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.