From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02E2DC282C4 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:15:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C557A222C7 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:15:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="f9r/YIAi" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C557A222C7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=rjwysocki.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To: Message-ID:Date:Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=+1R0z5wTCg1sJWcJjLcbC1sgs249/oo5+7UL3dDdkHU=; b=f9r/YIAiZ4bACh H/jMbgQopt2gNGHvb2hLxW7c5GxOpH/rnKmQaSFateWyLse5foVDYqEJFOnqrgyNOe6lHTItoXyXV 73zCK/hPG7GUhm8YSmevS363ytcI0BXwpQLWJZoLQKjEC5rkw1SEcLWAae7hmdeirzLpjMG3XGkww DqQIkqpFt8856CyWuEHukYyoCAkJgrJ/BuQ4FrlOvhV7M8PpcwrG41+0RjTWuT4YvV9bcQwDKMcx6 Nsqnh4qYM5A8a2YdXrRDzRmmVUpDMWQiH9zsZBpgSXy4fof9Uv12SVMGoY/yQbXyYfnXqXy89PFoN OYGmckkj+6NosAeaQrDQ==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gtgLB-0003x3-Hj; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:15:45 +0000 Received: from cloudserver094114.home.pl ([79.96.170.134]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gtgL8-0003wR-2e for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:15:44 +0000 Received: from 79.184.254.36.ipv4.supernova.orange.pl (79.184.254.36) (HELO aspire.rjw.lan) by serwer1319399.home.pl (79.96.170.134) with SMTP (IdeaSmtpServer 0.83.183) id 1561d8aff315dca9; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:15:36 +0100 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: James Morse Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/26] APEI in_nmi() rework and SDEI wire-up Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:14:18 +0100 Message-ID: <2507221.Jg8xd6amJ7@aspire.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <20190129184902.102850-1-james.morse@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190212_141542_283533_885D0AC1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 26.12 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Tony Luck , Xie XiuQi , ACPI Devel Maling List , Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Will Deacon , Christoffer Dall , Dongjiu Geng , Linux Memory Management List , Borislav Petkov , Naoya Horiguchi , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Linux ARM , Len Brown Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Monday, February 11, 2019 7:35:03 PM CET James Morse wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > On 11/02/2019 11:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 3:13 PM James Morse wrote: > >> On 08/02/2019 11:40, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 7:48:36 PM CET James Morse wrote: > >>>> This series aims to wire-up arm64's fancy new software-NMI notifications > >>>> for firmware-first RAS. These need to use the estatus-queue, which is > >>>> also needed for notifications via emulated-SError. All of these > >>>> things take the 'in_nmi()' path through ghes_copy_tofrom_phys(), and > >>>> so will deadlock if they can interact, which they might. > >> > >>>> Known issues: > >>>> * ghes_copy_tofrom_phys() already takes a lock in NMI context, this > >>>> series moves that around, and makes sure we never try to take the > >>>> same lock from different NMIlike notifications. Since the switch to > >>>> queued spinlocks it looks like the kernel can only be 4 context's > >>>> deep in spinlock, which arm64 could exceed as it doesn't have a > >>>> single architected NMI. This would be fixed by dropping back to > >>>> test-and-set when the nesting gets too deep: > >>>> lore.kernel.org/r/1548215351-18896-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com > >>>> > >>>> * Taking an NMI from a KVM guest on arm64 with VHE leaves HCR_EL2.TGE > >>>> clear, meaning AT and TLBI point at the guest, and PAN/UAO are squiffy. > >>>> Only TLBI matters for APEI, and this is fixed by Julien's patch: > >>>> http://lore.kernel.org/r/1548084825-8803-2-git-send-email-julien.thierry@arm.com > >>>> > >>>> * Linux ignores the physical address mask, meaning it doesn't call > >>>> memory_failure() on all the affected pages if firmware or hypervisor > >>>> believe in a different page size. Easy to hit on arm64, (easy to fix too, > >>>> it just conflicts with this series) > >> > >> > >>>> James Morse (26): > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Don't wait to serialise with oops messages when > >>>> panic()ing > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Remove silent flag from ghes_read_estatus() > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Switch estatus pool to use vmalloc memory > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Make hest.c manage the estatus memory pool > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Make estatus pool allocation a static size > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Don't store CPER records physical address in struct ghes > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Remove spurious GHES_TO_CLEAR check > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Don't update struct ghes' flags in read/clear estatus > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Generalise the estatus queue's notify code > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Don't allow ghes_ack_error() to mask earlier errors > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Move NOTIFY_SEA between the estatus-queue and NOTIFY_NMI > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Switch NOTIFY_SEA to use the estatus queue > >>>> KVM: arm/arm64: Add kvm_ras.h to collect kvm specific RAS plumbing > >>>> arm64: KVM/mm: Move SEA handling behind a single 'claim' interface > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Move locking to the notification helper > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Let the notification helper specify the fixmap slot > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Pass ghes and estatus separately to avoid a later copy > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Make GHES estatus header validation more user friendly > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Split ghes_read_estatus() to allow a peek at the CPER > >>>> length > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Only use queued estatus entry during > >>>> in_nmi_queue_one_entry() > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Use separate fixmap pages for arm64 NMI-like > >>>> notifications > >>>> mm/memory-failure: Add memory_failure_queue_kick() > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Kick the memory_failure() queue for synchronous errors > >>>> arm64: acpi: Make apei_claim_sea() synchronise with APEI's irq work > >>>> firmware: arm_sdei: Add ACPI GHES registration helper > >>>> ACPI / APEI: Add support for the SDEI GHES Notification type > >> > >> > >>> I can apply patches in this series up to and including patch [21/26]. > >>> > >>> Do you want me to do that? > >> > >> 9-12, 17-19, 21 are missing any review/ack tags, so I wouldn't ask, but as > >> you're offering, yes please! > >> > >> > >>> Patch [22/26] requires an ACK from mm people. > >>> > >>> Patch [23/26] has a problem that randconfig can generate a configuration > >>> in which memory_failure_queue_kick() is not present, so it is necessary > >>> to add a CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE dependency somewhere for things to > >>> work (or define an empty stub for that function in case the symbol is > >>> not set). > >> > >> Damn-it! Thanks, I was just trying to work that report out... > >> > >> > >>> If patches [24-26/26] don't depend on the previous two, I can try to > >>> apply them either, so please let me know. > >> > >> 22-24 depend on each other. Merging 24 without the other two is no-improvement, > >> so I'd like them to be kept together. > >> > >> 25-26 don't depend on 22-24, but came later so that they weren't affected by the > >> same race. > >> (note to self: describe that in the cover letter next time.) > >> > >> > >> If I apply the tag's and Boris' changes and post a tested v9 as 1-21, 25-26, is > >> that easier, or does it cause extra work? > > > > Actually, I went ahead and applied them, since I had the 1-21 ready anyway. > > > I applied the Boris' fixups manually which led to a bit of rebasing, > > so please check my linux-next branch. > > Looks okay to me, and I ran your branch through the POLL/SEA/SDEI tests I've > been doing for each version so far. Thanks for the confirmation! _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel