Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/32s: fix BATs setting with CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX

From
christophe leroy <hidden>
Date
2019-05-01 17:22:12
Also in
lkml
Reply to
Michael Ellerman, 2019-05-01

Le 01/05/2019 à 02:55, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
Christophe Leroy [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Serge reported some crashes with CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX enabled
on a book3s32 machine.

Analysis shows two issues:
- BATs addresses and sizes are not properly aligned.
- There is a gap between the last address covered by BATs and the
first address covered by pages.

Memory mapped with DBATs:
0: 0xc0000000-0xc07fffff 0x00000000 Kernel RO coherent
1: 0xc0800000-0xc0bfffff 0x00800000 Kernel RO coherent
2: 0xc0c00000-0xc13fffff 0x00c00000 Kernel RW coherent
3: 0xc1400000-0xc23fffff 0x01400000 Kernel RW coherent
4: 0xc2400000-0xc43fffff 0x02400000 Kernel RW coherent
5: 0xc4400000-0xc83fffff 0x04400000 Kernel RW coherent
6: 0xc8400000-0xd03fffff 0x08400000 Kernel RW coherent
7: 0xd0400000-0xe03fffff 0x10400000 Kernel RW coherent

Memory mapped with pages:
0xe1000000-0xefffffff  0x21000000       240M        rw       present           dirty  accessed

This patch fixes both issues. With the patch, we get the following
which is as expected:

Memory mapped with DBATs:
0: 0xc0000000-0xc07fffff 0x00000000 Kernel RO coherent
1: 0xc0800000-0xc0bfffff 0x00800000 Kernel RO coherent
2: 0xc0c00000-0xc0ffffff 0x00c00000 Kernel RW coherent
3: 0xc1000000-0xc1ffffff 0x01000000 Kernel RW coherent
4: 0xc2000000-0xc3ffffff 0x02000000 Kernel RW coherent
5: 0xc4000000-0xc7ffffff 0x04000000 Kernel RW coherent
6: 0xc8000000-0xcfffffff 0x08000000 Kernel RW coherent
7: 0xd0000000-0xdfffffff 0x10000000 Kernel RW coherent

Memory mapped with pages:
0xe0000000-0xefffffff  0x20000000       256M        rw       present           dirty  accessed

Reported-by: Serge Belyshev <redacted>
Fixes: 63b2bc619565 ("powerpc/mm/32s: Use BATs for STRICT_KERNEL_RWX")
Cc: <redacted>
I could probably still get this into v5.1 if you're confident it's a
good fix.
If possible it would be great.

Yes I'm confident it is a good fix:
- The fix has no impact on the configurations I tested originally (they were lacking a trailing area not mapped with BATs and the boundarie between RW and RO was a power of 2 so ffs() returned the same as lfs())
- The fix was tested by myself on QEMU.
- The fix was tested by Serge.
- The fix was acked by Segher.
- The fix make sense (ie ffs() is the good one, fls() was definitly wrong)

Christophe
cheers
---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Thread (4 messages) 4 messages, 3 authors, last reply 2019-05-03
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread / next series-diff position
kprevious message in thread / previous series-diff position
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help