linux-kernel - Re: ARM Juno r1 + CONFIG_PROVE

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191011144233.GA2438@bogus>
Date:   Fri, 11 Oct 2019 15:42:33 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc:     Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@....com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: ARM Juno r1 + CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y => boot failure

On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:43:54PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 03:15:32PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > Hi Sudeep
> >
> > On 11.10.2019 15:10, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 03:02:42PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > >> Hi James,
> > >>
> > >> On 11.10.2019 12:38, James Morse wrote:
> > >>> Hi guys,
> > >>>
> > >>> On 11/10/2019 11:05, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > >>>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:26:04AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > >>>>> Recently I've got access to ARM Juno R1 board and did some tests with
> > >>>>> current mainline kernel on it. I'm a bit surprised that enabling
> > >>>>> CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING causes a boot failure on this board. After enabling
> > >>>>> this Kconfig option, I get no single message from the kernel, although I
> > >>>>> have earlycon enabled.
> > >>>> I don't have Juno R1 but I tried defconfig + CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING and
> > >>>> it boots fine.
> > >>> I just tried this on my r1, v5.4-rc1 with this configuration worked just fine.
> > >>>
> > >>> My cmdline is:
> > >>> | root=/dev/sda6 loglevel=9 earlycon=pl011,0x7ff80000 hugepagesz=2M hugepages=512
> > >>> | crashkernel=1G console=ttyAMA0 resume=/dev/sda2 no_console_suspend efi=debug
> > >>>
> > >> That is a bit strange. Here is a boot log from v5.4-rc1 with pure
> > >> defconfig: https://paste.debian.net/1105851/
> > >>
> > > I see from the boot log that both Image.gz and dtb being loaded at the
> > > same address 0x82000000, will u-boot uncompress it elsewhere after loading
> > > it ? Just for my understanding.
> >
> > tftp downloads Image.gz to 0x82000000, then decompress it to
> > $kernel_addr to save transfer time
> >
> > my bootcmd is:
> >
> > tftp ${fdt_addr} juno/Image.gz; unzip ${fdt_addr} ${kernel_addr}; tftp
> > ${fdt_addr} juno/juno-r1.dtb; booti ${kernel_addr} - ${fdt_addr};
> >

If your ${kernel_addr}=0x80000000 or within first 32MB, then it will override
DTB with the image size I had(35MB). Even if kernel fits 32MB, there is a
chance that .bss lies beyond 32MB and it will be cleared during boot resulting
in DTB corruption(Andre P reminded me this)

Can you try setting $${fdt_addr} to 0x84000000 to begin with ?

--
Regards,
Sudeep