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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 B44E5C433DB for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 18:38:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 789FA22C9E for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 18:38:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390759AbhARSic (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2021 13:38:32 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:33266 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730765AbhARSha (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2021 13:37:30 -0500 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f069f001e13c6b7481d9a7b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f06:9f00:1e13:c6b7:481d:9a7b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 6DFC91EC0258; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 19:36:47 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1610995007; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=HzegoAfVAaZDbMTTGri4bkt9an6vYxRS8pFX5icPkSI=; b=LG+oqy9qBBRsJNBF02g3yaLSWmeU5nKLH4rV8OwnUJMlbGI7aILOqGDNGRd4Wqw+vXfeNL Vt4i06eSjr1IjIgLE492qqYnrQjqy2PhUilGbnGPEUTtI3ISyofSJraNVInPHVLR/rpnXY RvU1PrqluqrVphvE2q+gATDoQR5UnUc= Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 19:36:37 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Shiju Jose Cc: "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "james.morse@arm.com" , "mchehab+huawei@kernel.org" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "rrichter@marvell.com" , Jonathan Cameron , tanxiaofei , "linuxarm@openeuler.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] EDAC/ghes: Add EDAC device for the CPU caches Message-ID: <20210118183637.GD30090@zn.tnic> References: <20201208172959.1249-1-shiju.jose@huawei.com> <20201208172959.1249-2-shiju.jose@huawei.com> <20201231164409.GC4504@zn.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:06:30AM +0000, Shiju Jose wrote: > L2 cache corrected errors are detected occasionally on few of > our ARM64 hardware boards. Though it is rare, the probability of > the CPU cache errors frequently occurring can't be avoided. > The earlier failure detection by monitoring the cache corrected > errors for the frequent occurrences and taking preventive > action could prevent more serious hardware faults. > > On Intel architectures, cache corrected errors are reported and > the affected cores are offline in the architecture specific method. > http://www.mcelog.org/cache.html > > However for the firmware-first error reporting, specifically on > ARM64 architectures, there is no provision present for reporting > the cache corrected error count to the user-space and taking > preventive action such as offline the affected cores. How hard was it to write that in your first submission? What do you think would be the best way to persuade a patch reviewer/maintainer to take a look at your submission? > >Why a separate Kconfig item? > CONFIG_EDAC_GHES_CPU_CACHE_ERROR is added to make this > feature optional only for the platforms which need this and supported. > > > > >> + depends on EDAC_GHES depends on EDAC_GHES hardly expresses which platforms need it/support it. If anything, depends on ARM64. > >Init stuff belongs into ghes_scan_system(). > > > Did you mean calling ghes_edac_create_cpu_device() in the ghes_scan_system()? I mean, all hardware discovery needs to happen in ghes_scan_system - you don't need to call those from outside the driver, in ghes_edac_register(). -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette