From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sat Aug 4 19:28:39 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A216C1050878 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2018 19:28:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-it0-x233.google.com (mail-it0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B83A84C76 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2018 19:28:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-it0-x233.google.com with SMTP id d10-v6so12609512itj.5 for ; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:28:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JYzdJaQUXrFib9w8WsSNu4tPZiaEE95G5dyWvMfw11M=; b=CI9nRNzTf13M5YiQqRZD+I0za1OCiU+TriN2zlgfYeLdc792vWLneP8C3xY9NgQWD4 QULjlmkUOi4RbvB+Hv2261kfk2iH3UqlMfBytxYSzUXG0XY8s5vjvOttGMIjuKtmPeip 8CvyzsVclr2M7wpB1tvx8p3qiLJt+NZoLoCbOvE+112nrWgb8uVoujoiIUqZI5q0rFko 5UH1uoCgoHna7UeA9e7Mz9KwjCHHiRAJTZAknzhGOp+XhdLFFIjOFwNDofb+5gLEBQ18 1gvbno0YHxNUIZelIFbA9QDTpu73d5JPysH8VRY56cg0dtO87J/jTWFi2OFo2TVfFh5V Z9yg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JYzdJaQUXrFib9w8WsSNu4tPZiaEE95G5dyWvMfw11M=; b=Gdn/CQ5vVhnjSlMDG51jF9dH2W84Y/YPrM3Frkm18EvVnygtGfQlr26Nwr66xL3WNR ZBCAafUUgQyGXz7QgbOKMQ4FGdL96BFJ1DgBf2h45L9SAEf92MVJsub3+YNKR8++6hfm W9VEJCvIUo7xxN3IPWBUSpn4c9aG6Lc3OR9Iv4oi/+ULifd2sQ7nr2RMvl6tCEpMeiDm zlqriRwizSbC36WDcngL+7hrdtjIkAFTbDUQnrRmXTb2VPsNlNSIiBuY2Ua9x3uUNgGE jBgYA8TuQnsNebHibgqx/D4pHnSXFbYiTIIzxLFcQUiJetI7VXsYO1fmUBYER7VVzvnt Bw9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEseJG23cRIbt/MzRikaPC5dYYMgoGo5yK/mcExaa/OXx7PFaIX idcYflo1Nz2drJTsc8R8no3vMboljZ7zVkwNWojztw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfPVxJHi2H0NVzoW0TzuJE2RCi8rmweuj1HOA5N00uJliK/ZpOxmDsmpBT/X68E+dTmslsMjFp9hkB/lP8jvYo= X-Received: by 2002:a24:3ec3:: with SMTP id s186-v6mr10496819its.73.1533410918340; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:28:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180804083720.GJ6049@kib.kiev.ua> <20180804131352.GL6049@kib.kiev.ua> <1533394281.9860.5.camel@freebsd.org> <20180804152225.GP6049@kib.kiev.ua> <1533396347.9860.11.camel@freebsd.org> <20180804154327.GQ6049@kib.kiev.ua> <1533397631.9860.14.camel@freebsd.org> <20180804211858.e7ea14c07b239cacf06ef248@bidouilliste.com> In-Reply-To: <20180804211858.e7ea14c07b239cacf06ef248@bidouilliste.com> From: Warner Losh Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2018 20:28:25 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: panic: mutex pmap not owned at ... efirt_machdep.c:255 To: Emmanuel Vadot Cc: Ian Lepore , Konstantin Belousov , Kyle Evans , freebsd-current Current , Eitan Adler Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.27 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2018 19:28:39 -0000 On Sat, Aug 4, 2018, 8:21 PM Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 09:47:11 -0600 > Ian Lepore wrote: > > > On Sat, 2018-08-04 at 18:43 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > On Sat, Aug 04, 2018 at 09:25:47AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2018-08-04 at 18:22 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 04, 2018 at 09:58:43AM -0500, Kyle Evans wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 9:51 AM, Ian Lepore > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > What do we do on 32-bit arm that has no dmap but may have efi > > > > > > > runtime > > > > > > > support? > > > > > > > > > > > > > This should probably just be compiled out for !arm64 && !x86 - > its > > > > > > sole purpose was to compensate for outdated loader.efi that > hasn't > > > > > > done the SetVirtualAddressMap. EFI on 32-bit ARM is "new" enough > > > > > > that > > > > > > it shouldn't have this problem. > > > > > Does EFI on 32bit arm have RT support ? > > > > I suspect the uboot implementation doesn't, but I can't think of any > > > > reason why other implementations are not possible/available. In > > > > particular, even 32bit arm supports virtualization and such an > > > > environment could provide rt support. > > > No, I mean, does our kernel has RT support on armv7 ? I only > implemented > > > necessary VM tricks for amd64, then it was ported to arm64, and in both > > > cases it relies on 64bit address space and specific location of the > KVA. > > > > I didn't realize the kernel implementation was arch-specific. So I > > guess this comes under the category of "we'll solve that problem when > > something comes along that provides efi rt for arm32." > > U-Boot doesn't provide a runtime service, I never tested the available > port of EDK2 for BBB or RPI, I guess they boot the kernel in > HYP/non-secure mode and install an runtime in secure world along with > some > When I looked at it, I'd assumed there would be VA range we'd assign to the PAs in the EFI table that at the loader and kernel would agree on. The DMAP does this on x64 and aarch64, but that's not an option for armv7 nor i386. Warner >