Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 00/16] Xen ARM DomU ACPI support

[Shannon Zhao <zhaoshenglong@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2016/9/13 23:17, Julien Grall wrote:
> 
> 
> On 13/09/16 14:06, Shannon Zhao wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
> 
> Hello Shannon,
> 
>> On 2016/9/13 19:56, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> Hi Shannon,
>>>
>>> On 02/09/16 03:55, Shannon Zhao wrote:
>>>> From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> The design of this feature is described as below.
>>>> Firstly, the toolstack (libxl) generates the ACPI tables according the
>>>> number of vcpus and gic controller.
>>>>
>>>> Then, it copies these ACPI tables to DomU non-RAM memory map space and
>>>> passes them to UEFI firmware through the "ARM multiboot" protocol.
>>>>
>>>> At last, UEFI gets the ACPI tables through the "ARM multiboot" protocol
>>>> and installs these tables like the usual way and passes both ACPI
>>>> and DT
>>>> information to the Xen DomU.
>>>>
>>>> Currently libxl only generates RSDP, XSDT, GTDT, MADT, FADT, DSDT
>>>> tables
>>>> since it's enough now.
>>>>
>>>> This has been tested using guest kernel with the Dom0 ACPI support
>>>> patches which could be fetched from linux master or:
>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mfleming/efi.git/log/?h=efi/arm-xen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The UEFI binary could be fetched from or built from edk2 master branch:
>>>> http://people.linaro.org/~shannon.zhao/DomU_ACPI/XEN_EFI.fd
>>>
>>> On which commit this EFI binary is based? I am trying to rebuild myself,
>>> and go no luck to boot it so far.
>>>
>> I forgot the exact commit. But I just tried below commit which adds the
>> support to edk2 and the guest can boot up successfully with ACPI.
>>
>> 402dde6 ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen: Add ACPI support for Virt Xen ARM
> 
> Thanks, the commit does not build on my platform. After some help for
> Ard I managed to boot UEFI with the patch [1] applied.
> 
> However Linux does not boot when passing acpi=on and abort with the
> following message:
> 
> (d86) 6RCU: Adjusting geometry for rcu_fanout_leaf=64, nr_cpu_ids=1
> (d86) 6NR_IRQS:64 nr_irqs:64 0
> (d86) 3No valid GICC entries exist
> (d86) 0Kernel panic - not syncing: No interrupt controller found.
> (d86) dCPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.8.0-rc6+ #420
> (d86) dHardware name: XENVM-4.8 (DT)
> (d86) Call trace:
> (d86) [<ffff000008088708>] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x1a8
> (d86) [<ffff0000080888c4>] show_stack+0x14/0x20
> (d86) [<ffff0000083d6c2c>] dump_stack+0x94/0xb8
> (d86) [<ffff00000815c24c>] panic+0x10c/0x250
> (d86) [<ffff000008c223f8>] init_IRQ+0x24/0x2c
> (d86) [<ffff000008c20a24>] start_kernel+0x238/0x394
> (d86) [<ffff000008c201bc>] __primary_switched+0x30/0x74
> (d86) 0---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: No interrupt controller found.
> 
> This is because the header.length for GICC is not valid for ACPI 5.1
> (see BAD_MADT_GICC_ENTRY). So please check all the size of each table
> against ACPI 5.1.
> 
Oops. The reason is that acpi_madt_generic_interrupt in Xen is already
updated to ACPI 6.0 and the length is 80 not 76 of ACPI 5.1.
One solution is that we still use ACPI 5.1 and make gicc->header.length
76. Other one is that we update to ACPI 6.0 since the Xen ARM ACPI
support in Linux was introduced after ACPI 6.0.

Which one do you prefer?

Thanks,
-- 
Shannon


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel