[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-users] Error accessing memory mapped by xenforeignmemory_map()

Hello Julien,

On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello Brett,
> On 27/10/2017 22:58, Brett Stahlman wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Stefano Stabellini
>> <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> CC'ing the tools Maintainers and Paul
>>> On Fri, 27 Oct 2017, Brett Stahlman wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Adding the ARM maintainers.
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 11:54:59AM -0500, Brett Stahlman wrote:
>>>>>> I'm trying to use the "xenforeignmemory" library to read arbitrary
>>>>>> memory ranges from a Xen domain. The code performing the reads is
>>>>>> designed to run in dom0 on a Zynq ultrascale MPSoC (ARM64), though I'm
>>>>>> currently testing in QEMU. I constructed a simple test program, which
>>>>>> reads an arbitrary domid/address pair from the command line, converts
>>>>>> the address (assumed to be physical) to a page frame number, and uses
>>>>>> xenforeignmemory_map() to map the page into the test app's virtual
>>>>>> memory space. Although xenforeignmemory_map() returns a non-NULL
>>>>>> pointer, my attempt to dereference it fails with the following error:
>>>>>> (XEN) traps.c:2508:d0v1 HSR=0x93810007 pc=0x400a20 gva=0x7f965f7000
>>>>>> gpa=0x00000030555000
>>>>>> [   74.361735] Unhandled fault: ttbr address size fault (0x92000000)
>>>>>> at 0x0000007f965f7000
>>>>>> Bus error
>>>>> I'm not sure what a Bus error means on ARM, have you tried to look
>>>>> at traps.c:2508 to see if there's some comment explaining why this
>>>>> fault is triggered?
>>>> I believe the fault is occurring because mmap() failed to map the page.
>>>> Although xenforeignmemory_map() is indeed returning a non-NULL pointer,
>>>> code comments indicate that this does not imply success: page-level
>>>> errors might still be returned in the provided "err" array. In my case,
>>>> it appears that an EINVAL is produced by mmap(): specifically, I believe
>>>> it's coming from privcmd_ioctl_mmap_batch() (drivers/xen/privcmd.c), but
>>>> there are a number of conditions that can produce this error code, and I
>>>> haven't yet determined which is to blame...
>>>> So although I'm not sure why I would get an "address size" fault, it
>>>> makes sense that the pointer dereference would generate some sort of
>>>> paging-related fault, given that the page mapping was unsuccessful.
>>>> Hopefully, ARM developers will be able to explain why it was
>>>> unsuccessful, or at least give me an idea of what sorts of things could
>>>> cause a mapping attempt to fail... At this point, I'm not particular
>>>> about what address I map. I just want to be able to read known data at a
>>>> fixed (non-paged) address (e.g., kernel code/data), so I can prove to
>>>> myself that the page is actually mapped.
>>> The fault means "Data Abort from a lower Exception level". It could be
>>> an MMU fault or an alignment fault, according to the ARM ARM.
>>> I guess that the address range is not good. What DomU addresses are you
>>> trying to map?
>> The intent was to map fixed "guest physical" addresses corresponding to
>> (e.g) the "zero page" of a guest's running kernel. Up until today, I'd
> What do you mean by "zero page"? Is it the guest physical address 0? If so,
> the current guest memory layout does not have anything mapped at the
> address.

No. I didn't mean guest physical address 0, but rather the start of the
linux kernel itself: specifically, the code in head.S. IIUC, the kernel
bootstrap code responsible for decompressing the kernel typically loads
this code at a fixed address, which on x86 architectures, happens to be
0x100000. Thus, my assumption has been that if an unmodified Linux OS
were run in an x86 Xen guest, Xen would need to map guest physical
address 0x100000 to the machine physical address where the guest Linux
kernel is actually loaded. I'd also been assuming that if code running
in dom0 wished to use the foreignmemory interface to read the first page
of such a guest's kernel, it would need to provide the "guest physical"
address 0x100000 to xenforeignmemory_map(). I'm still thinking this may
be true for an *unmodified* guest (i.e., HVM), but having read more
about Xen's paravirtualized memory over the weekend, I'm thinking it
would not hold true for a paravirtualized (PV) guest, which doesn't have
the same concept of "guest physical" addresses.

>> assumed that a PV guest's kernel would be loaded at a known "guest
>> physical" address (like 0x100000 on i386), and that such addresses
>> corresponded to the gfn's expected by xenforeignmemory_map(). But now I
>> suspect this was an incorrect assumption, at least for the PV case. I've
>> had trouble finding relevant documentation on the Xen site, but I did
>> find a presentation earlier today suggesting that for PV's, gfn == mfn,
>> which IIUC, would effectively preclude the use of fixed addresses in a
>> PV guest. IOW, unlike an HVM's kernel, a PV's kernel cannot be loaded at
>> a "known" address (e.g., 0x100000 on i386).
>> Perhaps my use case (reading a guest kernel's code/data from dom0) makes
>> sense for an HVM, but not a PV? Is it not possible for dom0 to use the
>> foreignmemory interface to map PV guest pages read-only, without knowing
>> in advance what, if anything, those pages represent in the guest? Or is
>> the problem that the very concept of "guest physical" doesn't exist in a
>> PV? I guess it would help if I had a better understanding of what sort
>> of frame numbers are expected by xenforeignmemory_map() when the target
>> VM is a PV. Is the Xen code the only documentation for this sort of
>> thing, or is there some place I could get a high-level overview?
> I am a bit confused with the rest of this e-mail. There are no concept of
> HVM or PV on Arm. This is x86 specific. For Arm, there is a single type of
> guest that borrow the goods of both HVM and PV.
> For instance, like HVM, the hardware is used to provide a separate address
> space for each virtual machine. Arm calls that stage-2 translation. So gfn
> != mfn.

I was not aware that the HVM/PV concept didn't apply directly to ARM.
Is there a document that summarizes the way Xen's address translation
works on ARM? The document I've been looking at is...


...but I haven't found anything analogous for ARM. At any rate, if the
ARM hardware is providing a separate address space for each VM, then I
suppose the concept of "guest physical" addresses is still valid. Does a
guest physical address correspond to the output of stage-1 translation?
And are guest kernels on ARM generally loaded at fixed addresses (like
0x100000 in the x86 case), or is the kernel load address determined

Brett S.

> Cheers,
> --
> Julien Grall

Xen-users mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.