From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Baicar, Tyler" Subject: Re: [PATCH V15 03/11] cper: add timestamp print to CPER status printing Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:08:43 -0600 Message-ID: References: <1492556723-9189-1-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <1492556723-9189-4-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <20170421122150.76cce2cfrt767glv@pd.tnic> <35cc4ae0-e8fa-fd3a-5d7f-243ed2e82ea0@codeaurora.org> <20170421172603.4574wonnm5tgvbcn@pd.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170421172603.4574wonnm5tgvbcn@pd.tnic> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu To: Borislav Petkov Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, robert.moore@intel.com, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, lv.zheng@intel.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, fu.wei@linaro.org, rafael@kernel.org, zjzhang@codeaurora.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk, gengdongjiu@huawei.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, eun.taik.lee@samsung.com, shijie.huang@arm.com, labbott@redhat.com, lenb@kernel.org, harba@codeaurora.org, john.garry@huawei.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, punit.agrawal@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, nkaje@codeaurora.org, sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, tony.luck@intel.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, rruigrok@codeaurora.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, astone@redhat.com, hanjun.guo@linaro.org, joe@perches.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, bristot@redhat.com, shiju.jose@huawe List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org T24gNC8yMS8yMDE3IDExOjI2IEFNLCBCb3Jpc2xhdiBQZXRrb3Ygd3JvdGU6Cj4gT24gRnJpLCBB cHIgMjEsIDIwMTcgYXQgMTA6MDQ6MzVBTSAtMDYwMCwgQmFpY2FyLCBUeWxlciB3cm90ZToKPj4g VGhpcyBpcyBiYXNpY2FsbHkgd2hhdCBJIGFscmVhZHkgaGFkIGluIHYxNC4uLnlvdSBhc2tlZCB0 byBtb3ZlIGl0IGludG8gYQo+PiBkaWZmZXJlbnQgaWYtc3RhdGVtZW50PyBodHRwczovL2xrbWwu b3JnL2xrbWwvMjAxNy80LzEyLzM5Nwo+IFdlbGwsIGNsZWFybHkgSSd2ZSBiZWVuIHNtb2tpbmcg c29tZSBuYXN0eSBwb3RlbnQgc2gqdC4gOi1cCj4KPiAvbWUgZ29lcyBhbmQgbG9va3MgYXQgdGhl IHNwZWM6Cj4KPiAiQml0IDAg4oCTIFRpbWVzdGFtcCBpcyBwcmVjaXNlIGlmIHRoaXMgYml0IGlz IHNldCBhbmQgY29ycmVsYXRlcyB0byB0aGUKPiB0aW1lIG9mIHRoZSBlcnJvciBldmVudC4iCj4K PiBTbyB3aHkgYXJlIHdlIGV2ZW4gcHJpbnRpbmcgdGhlIHRpbWVzdGFtcCB3aGVuICFwcmVjaXNl Pwo+Cj4gSU9XLCBJIHRoaW5rIHdlIHNob3VsZCBkbzoKPgo+IAlpZiAoISh0aW1lc3RhbXBbM10g JiAweDEpKQo+IAkJcHJpbnRrKCIlc3RpbWVzdGFtcCBpbXByZWNpc2VcbiIsIHBmeCk7Cj4gCWVs c2Ugewo+IAkJc2VjID0gLi4KPiAJCW1pbiA9IC4uLgo+Cj4gCQkuLi4KPiAJfQo+Cj4gYW5kIHBy aW50IHRoZSBhY3R1YWwgdmFsdWVzIG9ubHkgd2hlbiB0aGUgdGltZXN0YW1wIGlzIHByZWNpc2Uu Cj4gT3RoZXJ3aXNlIGl0IGhhcyAqc29tZSogdmFsdWVzIHdoaWNoIGNvdWxkIGp1c3QgYXMgd2Vs bCBiZSBjb21wbGV0ZWx5Cj4gcmFuZG9tLiBBbmQgaXQncyBub3QgbGlrZSB3ZSdyZSByZXBvcnRp bmcgdGhlIGVycm9yIHRvbW9ycm93IC0gaXQgaXMKPiBtb3N0bHkgYSBjb3VwbGUgb2Ygc2Vjb25k cyBmcm9tIGxvZ2dpbmcgdG8gdGhlIGZ3IHB1c2hpbmcgaXQgb3V0Li4uClRoZSB0aW1lc3RhbXAg bWF5IHN0aWxsIGJlIHVzZWZ1bCB3aGVuIGl0IGlzIGltcHJlY2lzZS4gSW4gdGhlIHBvbGxpbmcg CmNhc2UsIHlvdSBtYXkgb25seSBwb2xsIGV2ZXJ5IG1pbnV0ZSBvciBzbywgc28gdGhlIHRpbWUg bWF5IGJlIHVzZWZ1bC4gCkFsc28sIEkgaW1hZ2luZSB0aGVyZSBjb3VsZCBiZSBpbnRlcnJ1cHQg YmFzZWQgZXJyb3JzIGhhcHBlbmluZyBtdWNoIApmYXN0ZXIgdGhhbiB0aGUgRlcvT1MgaGFuZHNo YWtlIGNhbiBoYXBwZW4uIE1heWJlIHdlIGNhbiBqdXN0IHVzZSB3aGF0IEkgCmhhZCBiZWZvcmUg YnV0IGFsc28gc3BlY2lmeSBpbXByZWNpc2Ugc28gdGhhdCBpdCBpcyBjbGVhcjoKCiAgICAgICAg IHByaW50aygiJXMlc3RzdGFtcDogJTAyZCUwMmQtJTAyZC0lMDJkICUwMmQ6JTAyZDolMDJkXG4i LCBwZngsCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAodGltZXN0YW1wWzNdICYgMHgxID8gInByZWNpc2UgIiA6ICJp bXByZWNpc2UgIiksCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgY2VudHVyeSwgeWVhciwgbW9uLCBkYXksIGhvdXIs IG1pbiwgc2VjKTsKClRoYW5rcywKVHlsZXIKCi0tIApRdWFsY29tbSBEYXRhY2VudGVyIFRlY2hu b2xvZ2llcywgSW5jLiBhcyBhbiBhZmZpbGlhdGUgb2YgUXVhbGNvbW0gVGVjaG5vbG9naWVzLCBJ bmMuClF1YWxjb21tIFRlY2hub2xvZ2llcywgSW5jLiBpcyBhIG1lbWJlciBvZiB0aGUgQ29kZSBB dXJvcmEgRm9ydW0sCmEgTGludXggRm91bmRhdGlvbiBDb2xsYWJvcmF0aXZlIFByb2plY3QuCgpf X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwprdm1hcm0gbWFp bGluZyBsaXN0Cmt2bWFybUBsaXN0cy5jcy5jb2x1bWJpYS5lZHUKaHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0cy5jcy5j b2x1bWJpYS5lZHUvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9rdm1hcm0K From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423433AbdDUSJM (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2017 14:09:12 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:34212 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161274AbdDUSJG (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2017 14:09:06 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 3AF05607A7 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=tbaicar@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V15 03/11] cper: add timestamp print to CPER status printing To: Borislav Petkov Cc: christoffer.dall@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, robert.moore@intel.com, lv.zheng@intel.com, nkaje@codeaurora.org, zjzhang@codeaurora.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, eun.taik.lee@samsung.com, sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com, labbott@redhat.com, shijie.huang@arm.com, rruigrok@codeaurora.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, tn@semihalf.com, fu.wei@linaro.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, bristot@redhat.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com, punit.agrawal@arm.com, astone@redhat.com, harba@codeaurora.org, hanjun.guo@linaro.org, john.garry@huawei.com, shiju.jose@huawei.com, joe@perches.com, rafael@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, gengdongjiu@huawei.com, xiexiuqi@huawei.com References: <1492556723-9189-1-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <1492556723-9189-4-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <20170421122150.76cce2cfrt767glv@pd.tnic> <35cc4ae0-e8fa-fd3a-5d7f-243ed2e82ea0@codeaurora.org> <20170421172603.4574wonnm5tgvbcn@pd.tnic> From: "Baicar, Tyler" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:08:43 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170421172603.4574wonnm5tgvbcn@pd.tnic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 4/21/2017 11:26 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:04:35AM -0600, Baicar, Tyler wrote: >> This is basically what I already had in v14...you asked to move it into a >> different if-statement? https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/12/397 > Well, clearly I've been smoking some nasty potent sh*t. :-\ > > /me goes and looks at the spec: > > "Bit 0 – Timestamp is precise if this bit is set and correlates to the > time of the error event." > > So why are we even printing the timestamp when !precise? > > IOW, I think we should do: > > if (!(timestamp[3] & 0x1)) > printk("%stimestamp imprecise\n", pfx); > else { > sec = .. > min = ... > > ... > } > > and print the actual values only when the timestamp is precise. > Otherwise it has *some* values which could just as well be completely > random. And it's not like we're reporting the error tomorrow - it is > mostly a couple of seconds from logging to the fw pushing it out... The timestamp may still be useful when it is imprecise. In the polling case, you may only poll every minute or so, so the time may be useful. Also, I imagine there could be interrupt based errors happening much faster than the FW/OS handshake can happen. Maybe we can just use what I had before but also specify imprecise so that it is clear: printk("%s%ststamp: %02d%02d-%02d-%02d %02d:%02d:%02d\n", pfx, (timestamp[3] & 0x1 ? "precise " : "imprecise "), century, year, mon, day, hour, min, sec); Thanks, Tyler -- Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tbaicar@codeaurora.org (Baicar, Tyler) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:08:43 -0600 Subject: [PATCH V15 03/11] cper: add timestamp print to CPER status printing In-Reply-To: <20170421172603.4574wonnm5tgvbcn@pd.tnic> References: <1492556723-9189-1-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <1492556723-9189-4-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <20170421122150.76cce2cfrt767glv@pd.tnic> <35cc4ae0-e8fa-fd3a-5d7f-243ed2e82ea0@codeaurora.org> <20170421172603.4574wonnm5tgvbcn@pd.tnic> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 4/21/2017 11:26 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:04:35AM -0600, Baicar, Tyler wrote: >> This is basically what I already had in v14...you asked to move it into a >> different if-statement? https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/12/397 > Well, clearly I've been smoking some nasty potent sh*t. :-\ > > /me goes and looks at the spec: > > "Bit 0 ? Timestamp is precise if this bit is set and correlates to the > time of the error event." > > So why are we even printing the timestamp when !precise? > > IOW, I think we should do: > > if (!(timestamp[3] & 0x1)) > printk("%stimestamp imprecise\n", pfx); > else { > sec = .. > min = ... > > ... > } > > and print the actual values only when the timestamp is precise. > Otherwise it has *some* values which could just as well be completely > random. And it's not like we're reporting the error tomorrow - it is > mostly a couple of seconds from logging to the fw pushing it out... The timestamp may still be useful when it is imprecise. In the polling case, you may only poll every minute or so, so the time may be useful. Also, I imagine there could be interrupt based errors happening much faster than the FW/OS handshake can happen. Maybe we can just use what I had before but also specify imprecise so that it is clear: printk("%s%ststamp: %02d%02d-%02d-%02d %02d:%02d:%02d\n", pfx, (timestamp[3] & 0x1 ? "precise " : "imprecise "), century, year, mon, day, hour, min, sec); Thanks, Tyler -- Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.