From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Sat Oct 31 16:40:49 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68647451318 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CNlKs1zs7z3RQZ for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 44197451317; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:49 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: bugs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E324511AD for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CNlKs13v3z3RQY for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1C08A8BF for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 09VGemII056270 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:48 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 09VGemFi056269 for bugs@FreeBSD.org; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:48 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 250580] VMware UEFI guests crash in virtual hardware after r366691 Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:49 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: Unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: prj@rootwyrm.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:40:49 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D250580 --- Comment #4 from Phillip R. Jaenke --- (In reply to Roger Leigh from comment #3) Yep, confirmed now this is not AMD-specific. Reproduced on a BabyDragon Gen= .5 and a BabyDragon Gen.3. Looking over things more closely, I am far more confident that imp@'s fix f= or bhyve is what broke VMware. I think the PCI probe is what's causing it. However, that makes it an open-ended question of is it FreeBSD at fault or = is it VMware at fault? If VMware's response is malformed, well, boom. But if FreeBSD's probe is malformed, also boom. We need to get a VMware engineer involved here to sort it out. I think we're running afoul of assumptions about behavior made on both sides. FreeBSD ass= umed where a video device would be previously, and assumed a reasonable response= to a probe, while VMware may have assumed FreeBSD wouldn't probe the video dev= ice, and may not be answering in a sane fashion. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=