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 83935C282CB for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 14:14:04 +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 4ECA12146E for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 14:14:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="V8DE7Gf9" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4ECA12146E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com 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:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description :Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=kGhBm1KREtGNFAt4r+S9/GCSomLiARMG07j9bRrwtv0=; b=V8DE7Gf9wmKrEz 6I9ilqIn2nUsqHDpBPRX+X85PB+omrjOwhsCv8tiooebfmf55gbCaasHiVlGzOKYN6fCPp+HiwxIY 7YG1qCcm4j2elJdIwOONjoVZYz97Usb9e/c2EtNpwtDLDn5tl4KqigL/vLZeuRDRL/f7bZjCsS7BP WnTX0aMySAT8cUGKyPe/LgCvmcfV+h7uz1KKPvy3sJWUZ2nDdnLC/vXzkUjLeLQ/TLkdmHigTGZPE DxNvpp87i+95EvIpObWM/Tdr4P67lApJVckd3TsCKeDn24VLgMXQSASC5HNLc93ODJiksZ1qET98e vkjNTxM5vMNpHpDQjMSw==; 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 1gs6up-0007nd-FB; Fri, 08 Feb 2019 14:14:03 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70] helo=foss.arm.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gs6ul-0007nC-Tu for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2019 14:14:01 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92D82A78; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 06:13:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.196.105] (eglon.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.105]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3706A3F557; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 06:13:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/26] APEI in_nmi() rework and SDEI wire-up To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Borislav Petkov References: <20190129184902.102850-1-james.morse@arm.com> <15200237.N8Ro7ITLGE@aspire.rjw.lan> From: James Morse Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 14:13:53 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <15200237.N8Ro7ITLGE@aspire.rjw.lan> Content-Language: en-GB X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190208_061359_972026_B1DB8B30 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 23.44 ) 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 , linux-mm@kvack.org, Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Xie XiuQi , Will Deacon , Christoffer Dall , Dongjiu Geng , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Naoya Horiguchi , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, 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 Hi Rafael, 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? Thanks, James _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel