[PATCH] Revert "efi_memory: do not add U-Boot memory to the memory map"

[Tom Rini]

On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 07:50:48AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Sughosh,
> 
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 at 04:48, Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu at linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 21:09, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Sughosh,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 00:53, Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu at linaro.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 at 18:48, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > A bisect of Ubuntu 2022.04 boot-failure on qemu-x86_64 resulted in this
> > > > > patch. I am not sure how to investigate it.
> > > > >
> > > > > The boot hangs at some point during booting of the install image, before
> > > > > the Ubuntu logo appears.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will sent a series with a script showing how it is run.
> > > > >
> > > > > This reverts commit a68c9ac5d8afc51c619c5d3e865fcf147bea90cb.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > I did some digging into this issue, and it turns out that the revert
> > > > is only masking the real issue. What this revert does is mark the
> > > > memory region occupied by U-Boot as EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE. The x86
> > > > kernel seems to mark memory regions other than
> > > > EFI_{BOOT,RUNTIME}_SERVICES_CODE as not executable -- and this is
> > > > precisely why this crash shows up only on x86. The actual cause of
> > > > this issue is in the efi runtime functionality of U-Boot. The kernel
> > > > is calling the SetVirtualAddressMap() runtime service function, and
> > > > that seems to be calling some of the boot service code of U-Boot,
> > > > which it shouldn't. We do not get the crash after disabling the
> > > > ConvertPointer() and SetVirtualAddressMap() runtime functions.
> > >
> > > OK, so what is the solution here? Did you send a patch?
> >
> > I am trying to check if the installation can be done by disabling the
> > ConvertPointer() and SetVirtualAddressMap() runtime service calls. If
> > so, then I will send a patch which disables them temporarily till the
> > actual issue is triaged and fixed. If the installation does not work
> > without these runtime calls, I would say putting this change in with
> > an explanation of what is happening (similar to the above
> > explanation). Please give me some more days, and I will let you know.
> > Thanks.
> 
> I forgot what happened with this. Could you update this thread, please?

After much further investigation to understand why the revert worked,
the revert was applied with a different commit message.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20250216/5c8b78ee/attachment.sig>