Bug 2214351
| Summary: | Fail to provision system: Unable to handle write to read-only memory in EFI runtime service | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Scott Weaver <scweaver> |
| Component: | kernel | Assignee: | Kernel Maintainer List <kernel-maint> |
| Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | acaringi, adscvr, airlied, alciregi, bskeggs, efuller, hdegoede, hpa, jarodwilson, josef, kernel-maint, lgoncalv, linville, masami256, mchehab, msalter, ptalbert, steved |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Regression, TestBlocker |
| Target Release: | --- | Flags: | scweaver:
needinfo?
(msalter) |
| Hardware: | aarch64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | Type: | --- | |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Scott Weaver
2023-06-12 18:00:53 UTC
Adding efi=novamap to the 5.14.0-319.el9 kernel command line on ampere-hr350a-04 does not disrupt the boot process, which further suggests that the firmware issue on Lenovo HR350A systems is different from the firmware issue in bug 2159239. A reboot of a kernel with that command line option was problematic, however, with different symptoms, as follows. [ 807.808415] CPU: 6 PID: 239 Comm: kworker/6:1 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G L X ------- --- 5.14.0-319.el9.aarch64 #1 [ 807.819877] Hardware name: Lenovo HR350A 7X35CTO1WW /HR350A , BIOS hve104r-1.15 02/26/2021 [ 807.829689] Workqueue: rcu_par_gp sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus [ 807.835599] pstate: 20000005 (nzCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) [ 807.842547] pc : smp_call_function_single+0xf4/0x1e0 [ 807.847500] lr : __sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus+0x280/0x420 [ 807.853147] sp : ffff80000ebe3cc0 [ 807.856448] x29: ffff80000ebe3cc0 x28: 0000000000000080 x27: 000000000000ff7f [ 807.863572] x26: ffff800009de41d0 x25: ffff80000a19c340 x24: ffff00be5af0e040 [ 807.870696] x23: ffff0008095f9500 x22: ffff8000099a5ca8 x21: 0000000000000080 [ 807.877820] x20: ffff8000099aa040 x19: ffff80000ebe3ce0 x18: ffffffffffffffff [ 807.884945] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000 x15: 0000000000000000 [ 807.892068] x14: 0000000000000000 x13: 0000000000000010 x12: 0101010101010101 [ 807.899192] x11: ffff8000099a5ca8 x10: 0000000000000001 x9 : ffff8000082465b0 [ 807.906316] x8 : ffff80000a194530 x7 : ffff800009995008 x6 : ffff800008248f00 [ 807.913440] x5 : 0000000000000000 x4 : ffff00be5aeef408 x3 : 0000000000000001 [ 807.920564] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : ffff00be5aeef400 x0 : 0000000000000007 [ 807.927689] Call trace: [ 807.930122] smp_call_function_single+0xf4/0x1e0 [ 807.934728] __sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus+0x280/0x420 [ 807.940027] sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus+0x18/0x20 [ 807.944980] process_one_work+0x1e4/0x4c0 [ 807.948976] worker_thread+0x220/0x450 [ 807.952713] kthread+0xe8/0xf4 [ 807.955756] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 Lenovo HR350A systems are susceptible to bug 2062958 (yet another firmware issue) but it's not yet clear whether that's related to the problem described here. Offhand that seems doubtful, since the recipe linked in bug 2159239 comment 16 did not show cma=1024M in the kernel command line (indeed it does not typically show up in the PXE boot, which was the only boot in that recipe). That recipe does show acpi=force in the kernel command line (specified in the job XML). Adding acpi=force to the 5.14.0-319.el9 kernel command line on ampere-hr350a-04 (without efi=novamap) does not seem to disrupt the boot process, so that command line option presumably does not explain the failure in the bug 2159239 comment 16 recipe. @ Hi Mark, Could you take another look into these types of errors for us? If this is a firmware issue do we need to reach out to the vendor or what do you think the next steps are here? Thanks for the help! Scott |