efi/arm/arm64: Allow SetVirtualAddressMap() to be omitted
The UEFI spec revision 2.7 errata A section 8.4 has the following to say about the virtual memory runtime services: "This section contains function definitions for the virtual memory support that may be optionally used by an operating system at runtime. If an operating system chooses to make EFI runtime service calls in a virtual addressing mode instead of the flat physical mode, then the operating system must use the services in this section to switch the EFI runtime services from flat physical addressing to virtual addressing." So it is pretty clear that calling SetVirtualAddressMap() is entirely optional, and so there is no point in doing so unless it achieves anything useful for us. This is not the case for 64-bit ARM. The identity mapping used by the firmware is arbitrarily converted into another permutation of userland addresses (i.e., bits [63:48] cleared), and the runtime code could easily deal with the original layout in exactly the same way as it deals with the converted layout. However, due to constraints related to page size differences if the OS is not running with 4k pages, and related to systems that may expose the individual sections of PE/COFF runtime modules as different memory regions, creating the virtual layout is a bit fiddly, and requires us to sort the memory map and reason about adjacent regions with identical memory types etc etc. So the obvious fix is to stop calling SetVirtualAddressMap() altogether on arm64 systems. However, to avoid surprises, which are notoriously hard to diagnose when it comes to OS<->firmware interactions, let's start by making it an opt-out feature, and implement support for the 'efi=novamap' kernel command line parameter on ARM and arm64 systems. ( Note that 32-bit ARM generally does require SetVirtualAddressMap() to be used, given that the physical memory map and the kernel virtual address map are not guaranteed to be non-overlapping like on arm64. However, having support for efi=novamap,noruntime on 32-bit ARM, combined with the recently proposed support for earlycon=efifb, is likely to be useful to diagnose boot issues on such systems if they have no accessible serial port. ) Tested-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org> Tested-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> Tested-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> Cc: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de> Cc: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> Cc: Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190202094119.13230-8-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.orgSigned-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment