Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1700265

Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the error

From "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the error
Date 2017-07-31 19:50 +0200
Message-ID <u9mZj-Kh-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <u8lVE-1pM-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <u8tTb-6Wj-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <u9lAe-8rv-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <u9mmB-wZ-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On 7/31/2017 11:00 AM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 10:15:27AM -0600, Baicar, Tyler wrote:
>> I think the better thing to do in this case is still send the ack. If
>> ghes_read_estatus() fails, then
>> either we are unable to read the estatus or the estatus is empty/invalid.
> Right now we silently handle that failure of ghes_read_estatus(). That
> might be hiding some Linux bugs if we are calling ghes_proc() in cases
> where we shouldn't.
>
> Perhaps we should have something like this, so if systems do start acting
> weirdly there will be a note that we took this path:
>
> 	rc = ghes_read_estatus(ghes, 0);
> 	if (rc) {
> 		pr_notice("surprise failure reading ghes estatus\n");
> 		goto out;
> 	}
Thank you Tony for the feedback, I can add a print like this in the next 
version. I'll verify that
rc is not -ENOENT though so we don't print it on empty scenarios since 
the polled source
will be hitting this path frequently.

-Tyler
>
>> If we do not send the ack, then we will be in a scenario where FW will not
>> send any more errors.
> We might ACK something that the firmware didn't send, which may
> lead to other problems.
>
>> I think it would be better to still have the FW send the errors and kernel
>> complain about issues with
> But I agree with this. We should send the ACK.  Luckliy this doesn't have
> a long legacy problem because the whole ACK mechanism is a new thing. So
> we only have to worry about GHESv2 supporting BIOS.
>
> -Tony

-- 
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 | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the error Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2017-07-29 00:30 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the  error Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-07-29 09:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the  error "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2017-07-31 18:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the  error "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com> - 2017-07-31 19:10 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the  error "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2017-07-31 19:50 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the  error "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2017-08-04 00:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the  error James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> - 2017-07-31 19:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the  error "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org> - 2017-07-31 20:00 +0200

csiph-web