[edk2-devel] [PATCH v10 1/4] OvmfPkg: Add memory acceptance event in AmdSevDxe

[Dionna Glaze via groups.io]

I'm rather confused at the moment how our internal testing succeeds
given the premise of the protocol is to use the specified behavior
that the OS must call get_memory_map again if ebs fails with
efi_invalid_parameter, but upstream does not appear to do this.
If you're able to make progress by applying this patch to your linux
build, then we might be back at square one, since the protocol's whole
purpose is to work with older SEV-SNP kernels.

diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c
b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c
index a0bfd31358ba..795db2315f35 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/x86-stub.c
@@ -747,6 +747,18 @@ static efi_status_t exit_boot(struct boot_params
*boot_params, void *handle)

        /* Might as well exit boot services now */
        status = efi_exit_boot_services(handle, &priv, exit_boot_func);
+       /*
+        * EBS may fail once with INVALID_PARAMETER, which means the
OS must call
+        * get_memory_map again and try EBS one more time.
+        */
+       if (status == EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER) {
+               status = allocate_e820(boot_params, &e820ext, &e820ext_size);
+               if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
+                       return status;
+
+               status = efi_exit_boot_services(handle, &priv, exit_boot_func);
+       }
+
        if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
                return status;

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 9:56 AM Gupta, Pankaj <pankaj.gupta at amd.com> wrote:
>
>
> >> - If no memory is getting accepted at all, should guest boot fail with
> >>     below errors?
> >
> > No, the guest should not error. EBS should return success on the
> > second call and permit progress.
> >
> >> - Why unaccepted memory not being set in my setup but works fine for
> >>     you? Does it require any other change?
> >>
> >
> > We have an internal fork of EDK2 that we regularly rebase on top of
> > upstream, and we have our own hypervisor called Vanadium. So there's a
> > lot different. We don't have an easy way to test with upstream EDK2
> > and Qemu.
> > A recent import found incompatibilities with measured boot only in
> > SEV-SNP that we have disabled, but that's related to NVdata, which we
> > deal with differently in GCE due to the cloud IVARS service and our
> > allergy to SMM emulation. Should be unrelated.
> >
> > I've looked over our OvmfPkg.patch that we maintain after every rebase
> > and most everything is related to our paravirtualized UEFI package
> > that eschews SMM to talk to Vanadium directly through either shared
> > memory or port I/O depending on whether the guest OS owns cr3 or not.
> >
> > You've added a log for the if != unaccepted memory, but will you log
> > what status the function ultimately returns? And both the MapKey what
> > status CoreTerminateMemoryMap returns in DxeMain.c's
> > CoreExitBootServices? I'm wondering if maybe the EFI stub calling EBS
> > isn't calling GetMemoryMap to update the MapKey after the
> > invalid_param result that this semantics depends on. If the stub is
> > the Linux kernel's own stub, then it should be doing the right
> > thing...
>
> CoreTerminateMemoryMap::MapKey::18033 ^M
> CoreTerminateMemoryMap::Status::2
> ....
> CoreTerminateMemoryMap::MapKey::18035 ^M
> CoreTerminateMemoryMap::Status::2 ^M
>
> Thanks,
> Pankaj
>
>
>


-- 
-Dionna Glaze, PhD (she/her)


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#100121): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/100121
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/96534752/1813853
Group Owner: devel+owner at edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [edk2-devel-archive at redhat.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-