From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: call into AER handling regardless of severity Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:19:32 +0200 Message-ID: <20170829221932.ojkvr4y6s76hcpkj@pd.tnic> References: <1503940314-29526-1-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <20170829082055.u3qpwtgyzxjxfvup@pd.tnic> <9abb2e99-44be-3315-47d9-2689b6c76d79@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:50009 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751240AbdH2WTu (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2017 18:19:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9abb2e99-44be-3315-47d9-2689b6c76d79@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Baicar, Tyler" , Tony Luck Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, will.deacon@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, prarit@redhat.com, punit.agrawal@arm.com, shiju.jose@huawei.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 03:27:42PM -0600, Baicar, Tyler wrote: > To avoid calling the > do_recovery() function for correctable errors I created > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9925877/ enum { GHES_SEV_NO = 0x0, GHES_SEV_CORRECTED = 0x1, GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE = 0x2, GHES_SEV_PANIC = 0x3, }; >>From all those severity types above, you want to do recovery for GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE but print *all* severities. Yes? I mean, this is what makes most sense: you want to dump all errors but try to recover from those from which you *actually* have the possibility to do so. Looking at the severities conversion, GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE is CPER_SEV_RECOVERABLE. cper_severity_to_aer() converts then CPER_SEV_RECOVERABLE to AER_NONFATAL. [ Btw, this is the dumbest sh*t ever. Three different severities!!! Looks like someone has won a contest of how to design something as needlessly complex as possible. ] So it looks to me like you want to do rather: if (entry.severity == AER_NONFATAL) do_recovery(pdev, entry.severity); which should correspond to the GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE. And this would be the straight-forward thing and that would be fine but... ... that is still not 100% equivalent because the check is: if (sev == GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE && sec_sev == GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE... so there's the severity of the estatus block and then the severity of each section successively. And I have no idea why we're doing this. Because if we have to keep this, then the above simplification won't work and you'll have to pass in a separate argument to aer_recover_queue(): aer_recover_queue( ..., sev == GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE && sec_sev == GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE, ... which, if true, would mean, do recovery. So let's find out first why do we have to look at both severities. Tony, any ideas? -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) --