Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Memory mapping issues in ARM64 #351

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

chintanpandya89
Copy link

No description provided.

Chintan Pandya added 2 commits September 14, 2022 14:18
vm map takes arg 3 as virtual address. And same needs
to be passed to retrieve aspace. Fix this by passing
right arg.

Test: Ran 'vm map' test
        ] vm map 0xc0000000 0xffff000ff0000000 1 0x0
        arch_mmu_map returns 0

Signed-off-by: Chintan Pandya <[email protected]>
Alias mapping with different mapping attributes creates
unknown behavior with either of the mappings. This was
specially observed when previously mapped cached region
is re-mapped at other virtual address as uncached region
creating stability issues as mentioned in b/240659444.
Do proper error checking for new mappings against
mmu_initial_mapping.

Test: Created alias mapping with mismatch attribute and
      tested on gem5
        ] vmm alloc_physical 0xc0000000 4096 10
        Mismatch attributes, device mapping failed
        vmm_alloc_physical: arch_mmu_map returns -17
        vmm_alloc_physical returns -5, ptr 0xffff000000000000

        ] vmm alloc_physical 0x2A000000 4096 10
        vmm_alloc_physical returns 0, ptr 0xffff000000000000

Signed-off-by: Chintan Pandya <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

@travisg travisg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good.

Copy link
Member

@travisg travisg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See comments. I'm a bit leery about the fundamental change without talking about it more (can schedule some time next week on chat), but the error handling changes are okay to take if they're split into a separate commit.

@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static int mem_test(int argc, const console_cmd_args *argv) {
}

/* allocate a region to test in */
status_t err = vmm_alloc_contiguous(vmm_get_kernel_aspace(), "memtest", len, &ptr, 0, 0, ARCH_MMU_FLAG_UNCACHED);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unfortunately this and the above code, in lkboot, rely on uncached mappings in order to properly work.

@@ -521,6 +523,35 @@ int arch_mmu_map(arch_aspace_t *aspace, vaddr_t vaddr, paddr_t paddr, uint count
return NO_ERROR;

int ret;

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This routine is a bit problematic due to generally removing the ability to map things as uncached anywhere in practice, except as a hardware register.

Is the problem that since the regular mapping still exists there can exist writeback cache lines that trash the uncached mapping (which seems possible) or that via the large mapping it can prefetch into it? In the latter case that generally seems harmless unless it's secure memory or whatnot, provided the memory is cleaned+invalidated (or just invalidated) prior to mapping it here. In that case the extra cached mapping can only at worse end up with a prefetch that ends up with a RO cache line.

@@ -370,10 +370,17 @@ status_t vmm_alloc_physical(vmm_aspace_t *aspace, const char *name, size_t size,

/* map all of the pages */
int err = arch_mmu_map(&aspace->arch_aspace, r->base, paddr, size / PAGE_SIZE, arch_mmu_flags);
LTRACEF("arch_mmu_map returns %d\n", err);
if (err) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These error catching routines here and below look good, can you split them into a separate commit so they can be taken independent of the meat of the change?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants