Linux-ACPI Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
To: <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <linuxarm@huawei.com>, <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	<bp@alien8.de>, <james.morse@arm.com>,
	<ard.beisheuvel@linaro.org>, <nariman.poushin@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] CCIX Protocol Error reporting
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 12:34:34 +0100
Message-ID: <20190625123434.00005d50@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190606123654.78973-1-Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>

On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 20:36:48 +0800
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> wrote:

Hi All,

I'm looking for some reviews on this series if anyone has time to take
a look.  Rasdaemon patches to match with this are on linux-edac but
are waiting on the tracepoints merging.

I'm not currently planning to upstream the qemu injection patches
used to test this but anyone would like those I can certainly put
a public branch up somewhere.

Thanks,

Jonathan

> UEFI 2.8 defines a new CPER record Appendix N for CCIX Protocol Error Records
> (PER). www.uefi.org
> 
> These include Protocol Error Record logs which are defined in the
> CCIX 1.0 Base Specification www.ccixconsortium.com.
> 
> Handling of coherency protocol errors is complex and how Linux does this
> will take some time to evolve.  For now, fatal errors are handled via the
> usual means and everything else is reported.
> 
> There are 6 types of error defined, covering:
> * Memory errors
> * Cache errors
> * Address translation unit errors
> * CCIX port errors 
> * CCIX link errors
> * Agent internal errors.
> 
> The set includes tracepoints to report the errors to RAS Daemon and a patch
> set for RAS Daemon will follow shortly.
> 
> There are several open questions for this RFC.
> 1. Reporting of vendor data.  We have little choice but to do this via a
>    dynamic array as these blocks can take arbitrary size. I had hoped
>    no one would actually use these given the odd mismatch between a
>    standard error structure and non standard element, but there are
>    already designs out there that do use it.
> 2. The trade off between explicit tracepoint fields, on which we might
>    want to filter, and the simplicity of a blob. I have gone for having
>    the whole of the block specific to the PER error type in an opaque blob.
>    Perhaps this is not the right balance?
> 3. Whether defining 6 new tracepoints is sensible. I think it is:
>    * They are all defined by the CCIX specification as independant error
>      classes.
>    * Many of them can only be generated by particular types of agent.
>    * The handling required will vary widely depending on types.
>      In the kernel some map cleanly onto existing handling. Keeping the
>      whole flow separate will aide this. They vary by a similar amount
>      in scope to the RAS errors found on an existing system which have
>      independent tracepoints.
>    * Separating them out allows for filtering on the tracepoints by
>      elements that are not shared between them.
>    * Muxing the lot into one record type can lead to ugly code both in
>      kernel and in userspace.
> 
> Rasdaemon patches will follow shortly.
> 
> This patch is being distributed by the CCIX Consortium, Inc. (CCIX) to
> you and other parties that are paticipating (the "participants") in the
> Linux kernel with the understanding that the participants will use CCIX's
> name and trademark only when this patch is used in association with the
> Linux kernel and associated user space.
> 
> CCIX is also distributing this patch to these participants with the
> understanding that if any portion of the CCIX specification will be
> used or referenced in the Linux kernel, the participants will not modify
> the cited portion of the CCIX specification and will give CCIX propery
> copyright attribution by including the following copyright notice with
> the cited part of the CCIX specification:
> "© 2019 CCIX CONSORTIUM, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED."
> 
> Jonathan Cameron (6):
>   efi / ras: CCIX Memory error reporting
>   efi / ras: CCIX Cache error reporting
>   efi / ras: CCIX Address Translation Cache error reporting
>   efi / ras: CCIX Port error reporting
>   efi / ras: CCIX Link error reporting
>   efi / ras: CCIX Agent internal error reporting
> 
>  drivers/acpi/apei/Kconfig        |   8 +
>  drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c         |  59 ++
>  drivers/firmware/efi/Kconfig     |   5 +
>  drivers/firmware/efi/Makefile    |   1 +
>  drivers/firmware/efi/cper-ccix.c | 916 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c      |   6 +
>  include/linux/cper.h             | 333 +++++++++++
>  include/ras/ras_event.h          | 405 ++++++++++++++
>  8 files changed, 1733 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/efi/cper-ccix.c
> 



  parent reply index

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-06 12:36 Jonathan Cameron
2019-06-06 12:36 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] efi / ras: CCIX Memory error reporting Jonathan Cameron
2019-06-21 17:40   ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-06-06 12:36 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] efi / ras: CCIX Cache " Jonathan Cameron
2019-06-06 12:36 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] efi / ras: CCIX Address Translation " Jonathan Cameron
2019-06-06 12:36 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] efi / ras: CCIX Port " Jonathan Cameron
2019-06-06 12:36 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] efi / ras: CCIX Link " Jonathan Cameron
2019-06-06 12:36 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] efi / ras: CCIX Agent internal " Jonathan Cameron
2019-06-25 11:34 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2019-07-03  9:28 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] CCIX Protocol Error reporting James Morse
2019-07-03 13:08   ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-08-06 11:14     ` Jonathan Cameron

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190625123434.00005d50@huawei.com \
    --to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=ard.beisheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=nariman.poushin@linaro.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-ACPI Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/0 linux-acpi/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-acpi linux-acpi/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi \
		linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org linux-acpi@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-acpi


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox