On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 at 19:41, E Shattow lucent@gmail.com wrote:
Replying my own message postscript
On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 4:47 AM E Shattow lucent@gmail.com wrote:
Following up on this with some positive results:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 4:22 AM Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de wrote:
On 21.11.24 09:04, Sughosh Ganu wrote:
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 at 13:49, E Shattow lucent@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, (on-list)
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 9:14 PM Sughosh Ganu sughosh.ganu@linaro.org wrote:
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 at 10:09, E Shattow lucent@gmail.com wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 6:42 PM Sughosh Ganu sughosh.ganu@linaro.org wrote: >> >> On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 at 04:48, E Shattow lucent@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> On HEAD some commits after v2024.10 I encounter a regression for >>> `bootefi bootmgr` fail with error "Not a PE-COFF file"; The fall-thru >>> case of global EFI boot is successful. >>> >>> Having run a git bisect I discover the first bad commit 22f2c9ed: >>> >>> $ git checkout -b master origin/master >>> branch 'master' set up to track 'origin/master'. >>> Switched to a new branch 'master' >>> $ git bisect start >>> status: waiting for both good and bad commits >>> $ git bisect bad HEAD >>> status: waiting for good commit(s), bad commit known >>> $ git bisect good v2024.10 >>> Bisecting: 850 revisions left to test after this (roughly 10 steps) >>> [82686e678e1587ddbd9570f82c58cdc3aecf2dbe] Merge branch 'staging' of >>> https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-tegra >>> $ git bisect good >>> Bisecting: 422 revisions left to test after this (roughly 9 steps) >>> [8963d433eb5d4a9f3a9def84e9c61a45c13e72bc] Merge tag >>> 'u-boot-rockchip-20241026' of >>> https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-rockchip >>> $ git bisect bad >>> Bisecting: 214 revisions left to test after this (roughly 8 steps) >>> [0a504585d1cefeaf35ae8f860a5e5aa44dfffed5] arm: dts: k3-j722s-binman: >>> Add support for HS-SE >>> $ git bisect bad >>> Bisecting: 106 revisions left to test after this (roughly 7 steps) >>> [88057dab2cde8710ccc95d12fb312184e0b023ca] mtd: spi-nor: Allow flashes >>> to specify MTD writesize >>> $ git bisect good >>> Bisecting: 53 revisions left to test after this (roughly 6 steps) >>> [625d40ab120dbc6f45dbd975857f8f87e422bd0f] test: boot: fix >>> bootflow_cmd_label for when DSA_SANDBOX is disabled >>> $ git bisect bad >>> Bisecting: 26 revisions left to test after this (roughly 5 steps) >>> [5b9261fb0b1ed087387f2036d279fd3f4bb20a61] Makefile: Drop >>> SPL_FIT_GENERATOR support >>> $ git bisect good >>> Bisecting: 13 revisions left to test after this (roughly 4 steps) >>> [e1b6822d6522d94d579d53092342b542d368a04b] efi_memory: do not add RAM >>> memory to the memory map >>> $ git bisect bad >>> Bisecting: 6 revisions left to test after this (roughly 3 steps) >>> [2f6191526a1325b6ddb59795a093eca69dbf8976] lmb: notify of any changes >>> to the LMB memory map >>> $ git bisect bad >>> Bisecting: 2 revisions left to test after this (roughly 2 steps) >>> [3c6896ad2fb876b0a23202f62a83c0d44380c9ea] lmb: add a flag to allow >>> suppressing memory map change notification >>> $ git bisect good >>> Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step) >>> [22f2c9ed9f533a56bed09bd4e0e37852b6b9f3b1] efi: memory: use the lmb >>> API's for allocating and freeing memory >>> $ git bisect bad >>> Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps) >>> [eb052cbb896fee6f947765b44b0d80a54b19ce1a] lmb: add and reserve memory >>> above ram_top >>> $ git bisect good >>> 22f2c9ed9f533a56bed09bd4e0e37852b6b9f3b1 is the first bad commit >>> >>> A commit is good if Star64 boots and absent the error about "Not a >>> PE-COFF file" (duly confirmed by eficonfig to adjust boot order >>> allowing removable media of an OS installer image on SD Card to be the >>> priority, verifying that the installer runs as expected). A commit is >>> bad if U-Boot crashes and/or has the error "Not a PE-COFF file". > >> >> Can you post the output of the following. Thanks. > >> >> 1) running the 'bdinfo' command > > U-Boot SPL 2024.10-00989-geb052cbb896f (Nov 19 2024 - 14:39:43 -0800) > ... > StarFive # bdinfo > boot_params = 0x0000000000000000 > DRAM bank = 0x0000000000000000 > -> start = 0x0000000040000000 > -> size = 0x0000000100000000 > flashstart = 0x0000000000000000 > flashsize = 0x0000000000000000 > flashoffset = 0x0000000000000000 > baudrate = 115200 bps > relocaddr = 0x00000000fff46000 > reloc off = 0x00000000bfd46000 > Build = 64-bit > current eth = ethernet@16030000 > ethaddr = 6c:cf:39:00:75:63 > IP addr = <NULL> > fdt_blob = 0x00000000ff72da20 > lmb_dump_all: > memory.count = 0x1 > memory[0] [0x40000000-0x13fffffff], 0x100000000 bytes flags: none > reserved.count = 0x2 > reserved[0] [0x40000000-0x4005ffff], 0x00060000 bytes flags: no-map > reserved[1] [0xfe729630-0xffffffff], 0x018d69d0 bytes flags: no-overwrite > devicetree = board > serial addr = 0x0000000010000000 > width = 0x0000000000000004 > shift = 0x0000000000000002 > offset = 0x0000000000000000 > clock = 0x00000000016e3600 > boot hart = 0x0000000000000001 > firmware fdt= 0x0000000042200000 > > U-Boot SPL 2025.01-rc2-00129-g7fe55182d926 (Nov 19 2024 - 19:56:55 -0800) > ... > StarFive # bdinfo > boot_params = 0x0000000000000000 > DRAM bank = 0x0000000000000000 > -> start = 0x0000000040000000 > -> size = 0x0000000100000000 > flashstart = 0x0000000000000000 > flashsize = 0x0000000000000000 > flashoffset = 0x0000000000000000 > baudrate = 115200 bps > relocaddr = 0x00000000fff46000 > reloc off = 0x00000000bfd46000 > Build = 64-bit > current eth = ethernet@16030000 > ethaddr = 6c:cf:39:00:75:63 > IP addr = <NULL> > fdt_blob = 0x00000000ff72da10 > lmb_dump_all: > memory.count = 0x1 > memory[0] [0x40000000-0x13fffffff], 0x100000000 bytes, flags: none > reserved.count = 0x3 > reserved[0] [0x40000000-0x4005ffff], 0x60000 bytes, flags: no-map > reserved[1] [0xfe72d620-0xffffffff], 0x18d29e0 bytes, flags: no-overwrite > reserved[2] [0x13fffb000-0x13fffffff], 0x5000 bytes, flags: > no-notify, no-overwrite > devicetree = board > serial addr = 0x0000000010000000 > width = 0x0000000000000004 > shift = 0x0000000000000002 > offset = 0x0000000000000000 > clock = 0x00000000016e3600 > boot hart = 0x0000000000000001 > firmware fdt= 0x0000000042200000 > > Differences in bdinfo output between working (parent of the > regression) and non-working (origin/master) version: > > -fdt_blob = 0x00000000ff72da20 > +fdt_blob = 0x00000000ff72da10 > lmb_dump_all: > memory.count = 0x1 > - memory[0] [0x40000000-0x13fffffff], 0x100000000 bytes flags: none > - reserved.count = 0x2 > - reserved[0] [0x40000000-0x4005ffff], 0x00060000 bytes flags: no-map > - reserved[1] [0xfe729630-0xffffffff], 0x018d69d0 bytes flags: no-overwrite > + memory[0] [0x40000000-0x13fffffff], 0x100000000 bytes, flags: none > + reserved.count = 0x3 > + reserved[0] [0x40000000-0x4005ffff], 0x60000 bytes, flags: no-map > + reserved[1] [0xfe72d620-0xffffffff], 0x18d29e0 bytes, flags: no-overwrite > + reserved[2] [0x13fffb000-0x13fffffff], 0x5000 bytes, flags: > no-notify, no-overwrite > >> >> 2) do you get any errors when running the 'bootefi bootmgr' command >> other than what you mention above >> > > U-Boot SPL 2024.10-00989-geb052cbb896f (Nov 19 2024 - 14:39:43 -0800) > ... > StarFive # bootefi bootmgr > Booting: mmc 0 > error: no suitable video mode found. > > U-Boot SPL 2025.01-rc2-00129-g7fe55182d926 (Nov 19 2024 - 19:56:55 -0800) > ... > StarFive # bootefi bootmgr > Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110 > Not a PE-COFF file > Loading Boot0000 'mmc 0' failed > Loading Boot0001 'nvme 0' failed > EFI boot manager: Cannot load any image > >> 3) What exactly do you mean by "global EFI boot is successful" >> > > I don't know what the correct name of it is. EFI can boot with what I > am labeling as global EFI boot and searching for fixed path names (?), > or I guess it can decide from EFI variables what to do which I > consider to be the user-configured EFI boot. One of these (the > user-configured EFI boot) is broken since the regression. > > U-Boot SPL 2024.10-00989-geb052cbb896f (Nov 19 2024 - 14:39:43 -0800) > ... > Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110 > Failed to load EFI variables > ** Booting bootflow '<NULL>' with efi_mgr > Booting: mmc 0 > error: no suitable video mode found. > > U-Boot SPL 2025.01-rc2-00129-g7fe55182d926 (Nov 19 2024 - 19:56:55 -0800) > ... > Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110 > Failed to load EFI variables > ** Booting bootflow '<NULL>' with efi_mgr > Not a PE-COFF file > Loading Boot0000 'mmc 0' failed > Loading Boot0001 'nvme 0' failed > EFI boot manager: Cannot load any image > Boot failed (err=-14) > ** Booting bootflow 'mmc@16010000.bootdev.part_1' with efi > Booting /\EFI\BOOT\BOOTRISCV64.EFI > error: no suitable video mode found.
Based on the logs above, it seems like you are booting using the bootmeth efi_mgr? If so, can you try disabling the bootstd config. I might be wrong, but I remember some issues with the bootstd efi_mgr method on some other platform. Also, are you available on irc?
-sughosh
>> -sughosh >> >>> >>> For context, the Star64 eMMC contains here an installed Debian Linux >>> OS in the usual way with Grub2 EFI on the EFI System Partition there, >>> and that image boots fine from U-Boot v2024.10 also when loaded into >>> memory and using 'bootefi' directly on that memory address. >>> > > Thanks, > > -E Shattow
Confirming that some discussion about this happened off-list with a positive result and now awaiting a fix.
I tried to reproduce this issue on the qemu arm64 virt platform, with 4GB of DRAM memory starting from 0x4000_0000 - 0x1_4000_0000. This is the exact same memory map for DRAM memory as on your board. I also modified the value of ram_top to 4GB, as on your board. But I am unable to hit this on the qemu arm64 platform when I try to boot the Debian image with 'bootefi bootmgr' command. The only difference that I see is that on the qemu emulator, the OS is on a virtio disk, as against mmc in your case. So I think we should try to get to the root cause of this. I think you mentioned on irc yesterday that you observe this on two boards, so there is definitely something going on here.
-sughosh
Thanks very much! -E
Hello Eric,
I reproduced the issue you had with the Debian installer on a Pine64 Star64 with 8 GiB.
try_load_from_media: file_path = /VenHw(e61d73b9-a384-4acc-aeab-82e828f3628b,0000000000000000)/VenHw(e61d73b9-a384-4acc-aeab-82e828f3628b,6d00000000000000)/SD(1)/SD(1) no file name present, try default file try_load_from_media: final_dp = /VenHw(e61d73b9-a384-4acc-aeab-82e828f3628b,0000000000000000)/VenHw(e61d73b9-a384-4acc-aeab-82e828f3628b,6d00000000000000)/SD(1)/SD(1)/HD(2,0x01,0,0x1da800,0x1000)/\EFI\BOOT\BOOTRISCV64.EFI efi_load_image_from_file: buffer 0x23feab000, size 0x11d000 efi_load_pe: efi 0x000000023feab000, size 0x11d000 Not a PE-COFF file Loading Boot0000 'mmc 1' failed EFI boot manager: Cannot load any image Boot failed (err=-14) Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110 ** Booting bootflow 'mmc@16020000.bootdev.part_2' with efi efi_install_fdt: fdt copied to 0x000000023ffba000 Booting /\EFI\BOOT\BOOTRISCV64.EFI efi_load_pe: efi 0x0000000040200000, size 0x11d000 error: no such device: /.disk/info.
So loading to high memory fails though CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER is enabled.
With CONFIG_EFI_LOADER_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y booting the Debian installer image succeeds.
In efi_disk.c we call disk_blk_read(). But CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER is only evaluated in blk_read() same for write. This should be changed.
CONFIG_EFI_LOADER_BOUNCE_BUFFER should not depend on an architecture.
@Hal, @Minda The MMC driver not supporting addresses over 4GiB, is this due to a hardware deficiency or can that be fixed in the U-Boot driver?
Best regards
Heinrich
A combination of these two series remedy this issue:
"configs: JH7110: enable EFI_LOADER_BOUNCE_BUFFER" "bouncebuf: Allow allocation from U-Boot heap"
Tested on 4GB Milk-V Mars CM Lite, 8GB Milk-V Mars CM Lite WiFi, 4GB Pine64 Star64.
Sughosh can you please add to your series my Tested-by: E Shattow lucent@gmail.com
...
-E
Postscript I'm getting failure when 'load mmc' a large file, but success 'load mmc' a small file. Same applies for 'bootefi bootmgr' whatever file access it is making.
Okay admittedly I am frustrated and confused what is our testing methodology here? I don't actually know what is broken (something unspecified in an mmc driver) and what we are fixing (preventing the new behavior which does not agree with the old driver - how?).
The problem appears to be a broken mmc implementation and we are not fixing that by these buffering tricks.
As discussed offline, this is because you are trying to load a very big file, and your platform only has 8MB of heap region. And I don't think that loading multiple MB's of data from mmc is an unusual scenario. I am thinking now that the original change which I had shared with you would be the most appropriate solution for this.
-sughosh
-E