Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1499941
| From | "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 |
| Date | 2016-10-13 00:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <srAc9-2kO-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <spL21-6h3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <spL22-6h3-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <sr9c0-195-81@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hello Suzuki,
Thank you for the feedback! Responses below.
On 10/11/2016 11:28 AM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 07/10/16 22:31, Tyler Baicar wrote:
>> Currently when a RAS error is reported it is not timestamped.
>> The ACPI 6.1 spec adds the timestamp field to the generic error
>> data entry v3 structure. The timestamp of when the firmware
>> generated the error is now being reported.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Ruigrok <rruigrok@codeaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Naveen Kaje <nkaje@codeaurora.org>
>
> Please could you keep the people who reviewed/commented on your series
> in the past,
> whenever you post a new version ?
Do you mean to just send the new version to their e-mail directly in
addition to the lists? If so, I will do that next time.
I know you provided good feedback on the previous patchset, but I did
not have anyone specifically respond to add "reviewed-by:...". I don't
think I should add reviewed-by for someone unless they specifically add
it in a response :)
>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 25 ++++++++++--
>> drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c | 97
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>> 2 files changed, 105 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> index 3021f0e..c8488f1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> @@ -80,6 +80,10 @@
>> ((struct acpi_hest_generic_status *) \
>> ((struct ghes_estatus_node *)(estatus_node) + 1))
>>
>> +#define acpi_hest_generic_data_version(gdata) \
>> + (gdata->revision >> 8)
>
> ...
>
>> +inline void *acpi_hest_generic_data_payload(struct
>> acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata)
>> +{
>> + return acpi_hest_generic_data_version(gdata) >= 3 ?
>> + (void *)(((struct acpi_hest_generic_data_v300 *)(gdata)) + 1) :
>> + gdata + 1;
>> +}
>> +
>
>
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
>> index d425374..9fa1317 100644
>> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
>
>> +#define acpi_hest_generic_data_version(gdata) \
>> + (gdata->revision >> 8)
>> +
>
> ...
>
>> +static inline void *acpi_hest_generic_data_payload(struct
>> acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata)
>> +{
>> + return acpi_hest_generic_data_version(gdata) >= 3 ?
>> + (void *)(((struct acpi_hest_generic_data_v300 *)(gdata)) + 1) :
>> + gdata + 1;
>> +}
>
> Could these go to a header file, so that we don't need duplicate
> definitions of these helpers in
> different files ?
>
I think that should work to avoid duplication. I will move them to a
header file in the next patchset.
>> +
>> +static void cper_estatus_print_section_v300(const char *pfx,
>> + const struct acpi_hest_generic_data_v300 *gdata)
>> +{
>> + __u8 hour, min, sec, day, mon, year, century, *timestamp;
>> +
>> + if (gdata->validation_bits & ACPI_HEST_GEN_VALID_TIMESTAMP) {
>> + timestamp = (__u8 *)&(gdata->time_stamp);
>> + memcpy(&sec, timestamp, 1);
>> + memcpy(&min, timestamp + 1, 1);
>> + memcpy(&hour, timestamp + 2, 1);
>> + memcpy(&day, timestamp + 4, 1);
>> + memcpy(&mon, timestamp + 5, 1);
>> + memcpy(&year, timestamp + 6, 1);
>> + memcpy(¢ury, timestamp + 7, 1);
>> + printk("%stime: ", pfx);
>> + printk("%7s", 0x01 & *(timestamp + 3) ? "precise" : "");
>
> What format is the (timestamp + 3) stored in ? Does it need conversion ?
The third byte of the timestamp is currently only used to determine if
the time is precise or not. Bit 0 is used to specify that and the other
bits in this byte are marked as reserved. This is shown in table 247 of
the UEFI spec 2.6:
Byte 3:
Bit 0 – Timestamp is precise if this bit is set and correlates to the
time of the error event.
Bit 7:1 – Reserved
>
>> + printk(" %02d:%02d:%02d %02d%02d-%02d-%02d\n",
>> + bcd2bin(hour), bcd2bin(min), bcd2bin(sec),
>> + bcd2bin(century), bcd2bin(year), bcd2bin(mon),
>> + bcd2bin(day));
>> + }
>
> minor nit: Would it be easier to order/parse the error messages if the
> date
> is printed first followed by time ?
>
> i.e,
> 17:20:14 2016-09-15 Mon
> vs
> 2016-09-15 Mon 17:20:14
>
> e.g, people looking at a huge log, looking for logs from a specific
> date might
> find the latter more useful to skip the messages.
>
The latter does seem like it would be better for parsing large logs. I
can rearrange the order in the next patchset.
>> +}
>> +
>> static void cper_estatus_print_section(
>> - const char *pfx, const struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata, int
>> sec_no)
>> + const char *pfx, struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata, int sec_no)
>> {
>> uuid_le *sec_type = (uuid_le *)gdata->section_type;
>> __u16 severity;
>> char newpfx[64];
>>
>> + if ((gdata->revision >> 8) >= 0x03)
>
> Could we use the helper defined above ?
Yes, I'll change this to use acpi_hest_generic_data_version(gdata) instead.
>
>> @@ -451,12 +497,22 @@ void cper_estatus_print(const char *pfx,
>> printk("%s""event severity: %s\n", pfx,
>> cper_severity_str(severity));
>> data_len = estatus->data_length;
>> gdata = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data *)(estatus + 1);
>> + if ((gdata->revision >> 8) >= 0x03)
>
> Same as above, use the macro ?
Yes, I'll change this to use acpi_hest_generic_data_version(gdata) instead.
>
>> + gdata_v3 = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data_v300 *)gdata;
>> +
>> snprintf(newpfx, sizeof(newpfx), "%s%s", pfx, INDENT_SP);
>> +
>> while (data_len >= sizeof(*gdata)) {
>> gedata_len = gdata->error_data_length;
>> cper_estatus_print_section(newpfx, gdata, sec_no);
>> - data_len -= gedata_len + sizeof(*gdata);
>> - gdata = (void *)(gdata + 1) + gedata_len;
>> + if(gdata_v3) {
>> + data_len -= gedata_len + sizeof(*gdata_v3);
>> + gdata_v3 = (void *)(gdata_v3 + 1) + gedata_len;
>> + gdata = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data *)gdata_v3;
>> + } else {
>> + data_len -= gedata_len + sizeof(*gdata);
>> + gdata = (void *)(gdata + 1) + gedata_len;
>> + }
>> sec_no++;
>> }
>
> ...
>
>>
>> @@ -486,15 +543,29 @@ int cper_estatus_check(const struct
>> acpi_hest_generic_status *estatus)
>> return rc;
>> data_len = estatus->data_length;
>> gdata = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data *)(estatus + 1);
>> - while (data_len >= sizeof(*gdata)) {
>> - gedata_len = gdata->error_data_length;
>> - if (gedata_len > data_len - sizeof(*gdata))
>> +
>> + if ((gdata->revision >> 8) >= 0x03) {
>> + gdata_v3 = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data_v300 *)gdata;
>> + while (data_len >= sizeof(*gdata_v3)) {
>> + gedata_len = gdata_v3->error_data_length;
>> + if (gedata_len > data_len - sizeof(*gdata_v3))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + data_len -= gedata_len + sizeof(*gdata_v3);
>> + gdata_v3 = (void *)(gdata_v3 + 1) + gedata_len;
>> + }
>> + if (data_len)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + } else {
>> + while (data_len >= sizeof(*gdata)) {
>> + gedata_len = gdata->error_data_length;
>> + if (gedata_len > data_len - sizeof(*gdata))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + data_len -= gedata_len + sizeof(*gdata);
>> + gdata = (void *)(gdata + 1) + gedata_len;
>> + }
>> + if (data_len)
>
> As mentioned in the previous version, would it make sense to add some
> more
> helpers to deal with record versions ? We seem to be doing the version
> switch and
> code duplication at different places.
>
> Does the following help ? Thoughts ?
>
> #define acpi_hest_generic_data_error_length(gdata) (((struct
> acpi_hest_generic_data *)(gdata))->error_data_length)
> #define acpi_hest_generic_data_size(gdata) \
> ((acpi_hest_generic_data_version(gdata) >= 3) ? \
> sizeof(struct acpi_hest_generic_data_v300) : \
> sizeof(struct acpi_hest_generic_data))
> #define acpi_hest_generic_data_record_size(gdata)
> (acpi_hest_generic_data_size(gdata) + \
> acpi_hest_generic_data_error_length(gdata))
> #define acpi_hest_generic_data_next(gdata) \
> ((void *)(gdata) + acpi_hest_generic_data_record_size(gdata))
>
>
> Suzuki
These helpers will definitely help consolidate this code. I will use
these in the next version to remove the code duplication here.
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.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH V3 00/10] Add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI 6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64 Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
[PATCH V3 07/10] efi: print unrecognized CPER section Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
[PATCH V3 08/10] ras: acpi / apei: generate trace event for unrecognized CPER section Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 08/10] ras: acpi / apei: generate trace event for unrecognized CPER section Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> - 2016-10-13 13:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 08/10] ras: acpi / apei: generate trace event for unrecognized CPER section "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-13 22:20 +0200
[PATCH V3 10/10] arm64: KVM: add guest SEA support Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 10/10] arm64: KVM: add guest SEA support Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> - 2016-10-13 15:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 10/10] arm64: KVM: add guest SEA support "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-13 22:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 10/10] arm64: KVM: add guest SEA support Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> - 2016-10-14 11:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 10/10] arm64: KVM: add guest SEA support "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-15 00:00 +0200
[PATCH V3 03/10] efi: parse ARMv8 processor error Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
[PATCH V3 01/10] acpi: apei: read ack upon ghes record consumption Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 01/10] acpi: apei: read ack upon ghes record consumption Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> - 2016-10-12 20:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 01/10] acpi: apei: read ack upon ghes record consumption "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-13 16:00 +0200
[PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> - 2016-10-12 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-13 16:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> - 2016-10-14 11:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> - 2016-10-18 14:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 "Abdulhamid, Harb" <harba@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-19 19:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com> - 2016-10-23 11:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> - 2016-10-18 15:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 "Abdulhamid, Harb" <harba@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-19 19:20 +0200
[PATCH V3 04/10] arm64: exception: handle Synchronous External Abort Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 04/10] arm64: exception: handle Synchronous External Abort Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> - 2016-10-12 19:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 04/10] arm64: exception: handle Synchronous External Abort "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-13 16:00 +0200
[PATCH V3 09/10] trace, ras: add ARM processor error trace event Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 09/10] trace, ras: add ARM processor error trace event Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2016-10-07 23:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 09/10] trace, ras: add ARM processor error trace event "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-12 23:30 +0200
[PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2016-10-11 19:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-13 00:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2016-10-13 11:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-13 21:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2016-10-14 18:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2016-10-14 18:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk> - 2016-10-11 21:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 02/10] ras: acpi/apei: cper: generic error data entry v3 per ACPI 6.1 "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-13 00:20 +0200
[PATCH V3 06/10] acpi: apei: panic OS with fatal error status block Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-07 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 06/10] acpi: apei: panic OS with fatal error status block Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2016-10-13 15:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH V3 06/10] acpi: apei: panic OS with fatal error status block "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2016-10-14 01:50 +0200
csiph-web