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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1198755 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map

Started byWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
First post2015-08-03 13:30 +0200
Last post2015-08-05 11:30 +0200
Articles 10 — 4 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> - 2015-08-03 13:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2015-08-03 18:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2015-08-04 06:30 +0200
        Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map "Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org> - 2015-08-04 17:50 +0200
          Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2015-08-05 11:30 +0200
            Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map "Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org> - 2015-08-05 18:00 +0200
              Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2015-08-05 18:20 +0200
                Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map "Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org> - 2015-08-06 15:50 +0200
              Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2015-08-05 18:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2015-08-05 11:30 +0200

#1198755 — Re: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map

FromWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Date2015-08-03 13:30 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH V9 0/5] map GHES memory region according to EFI memory map
Message-ID<pTm6m-1Bo-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
Hi Jonathan,

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:35:04PM +0100, Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang wrote:
> From: "Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
> 
> On a platform with APEI (ACPI Platform Error Interface) enabled, firmware
> updates a memory region with hardware error record using nocache
> attribute. When OS reads the region, since it maps the region with
> cacahed attribute even though EFI memory map defines this region as
> uncached, OS gets stale data and errorneously reports there is no new
> HW error.
> 
> When ghes driver maps the memory region, it uses the cache attribute
> according to EFI memory map, if EFI memory map feature is enabled
> at runtime.
> 
> Since both arch/x86 and arch/ia64 implemented architecture agnostic EFI
> memory map attribue lookup function efi_memattributes(), the code is
> moved from arch/x86 into EFI subsystem and is declared as __weak; archs
> other than ia64 should not override the default implementation.
> 
> V9:
> 1. Rebased to arm64-upstream-14543 of arm64/master.
> 2. Match strict MM type in arch_apei_get_mem_attribute().

I guess this is all going via Matt's tree? I'm happy to take the new
memory type in arch/arm64/ if there's nothing currently queued, but I
suspect it makes more sense for it to stay together.

Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1199023

FromMatt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date2015-08-03 18:30 +0200
Message-ID<pTqMG-8nK-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1198755
On Mon, 03 Aug, at 12:26:58PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> 
> I guess this is all going via Matt's tree? I'm happy to take the new
> memory type in arch/arm64/ if there's nothing currently queued, but I
> suspect it makes more sense for it to stay together.

Right, it probably does make sense to take this through a single tree.

I'm still waiting for the ACPI folks to chime in on whether this series
makes sense, and in particular I'd like to hear from people that have
touched ghes.c in the past.

Rafael, Boris?

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1199405

FromBorislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Date2015-08-04 06:30 +0200
Message-ID<pTC1r-814-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1199023
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 05:23:54PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> Rafael, Boris?

The ghes.c change looks fine I guess. The whole patchset makes sense
now, with the arch bits extracted. So

Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>

However, we probably should work towards adhering to EFI memory
attributes on x86, long term, as we talked. But that's a future thing.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1200110

From"Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
Date2015-08-04 17:50 +0200
Message-ID<pTMDw-6sx-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1199405
On 8/3/2015 9:25 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 05:23:54PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> Rafael, Boris?
>
> The ghes.c change looks fine I guess. The whole patchset makes sense
> now, with the arch bits extracted. So
>
> Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Thank you Boris/Matt/Will for the support.

>
> However, we probably should work towards adhering to EFI memory
> attributes on x86, long term, as we talked. But that's a future thing.
>
> Thanks.
>

-- 
Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1200578

FromMatt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date2015-08-05 11:30 +0200
Message-ID<pU3bm-5xL-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1200110
On Tue, 04 Aug, at 08:41:36AM, Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong wrote:
> 
> On 8/3/2015 9:25 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 05:23:54PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> >>Rafael, Boris?
> >
> >The ghes.c change looks fine I guess. The whole patchset makes sense
> >now, with the arch bits extracted. So
> >
> >Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
> Thank you Boris/Matt/Will for the support.

Jonathan, if you fixup the compiler error in PATCH 2 I'll take this
series through the EFI tree.

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1200935

From"Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
Date2015-08-05 18:00 +0200
Message-ID<pU9gL-5S2-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1200578
On 8/5/2015 2:21 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Aug, at 08:41:36AM, Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong wrote:
>>
>> On 8/3/2015 9:25 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 05:23:54PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
>>>> Rafael, Boris?
>>>
>>> The ghes.c change looks fine I guess. The whole patchset makes sense
>>> now, with the arch bits extracted. So
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
>> Thank you Boris/Matt/Will for the support.
>
> Jonathan, if you fixup the compiler error in PATCH 2 I'll take this
> series through the EFI tree.
Yes, absolutely. It has been in my mind, sorry I was tied up in the last
few days. I wonder what I may missed, I certainly do x86 build test with
versions of the patch set.

I will try today and report back.

-- 
Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1200950

FromMatt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date2015-08-05 18:20 +0200
Message-ID<pU9A5-6u8-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1200935
On Wed, 05 Aug, at 05:10:00PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Aug, at 08:58:52AM, Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong wrote:
> > 
> > Yes, absolutely. It has been in my mind, sorry I was tied up in the last
> > few days. I wonder what I may missed, I certainly do x86 build test with
> > versions of the patch set.
> > 
> > I will try today and report back.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> I'd suggest moving the implementation into include/acpi/apei.h and
> leaving it as static inline instead of implementing it out of line in
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/apei.c.

Yeah, I didn't mean include/acpi/apei.h but the architecture-specific
equivalent.

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1201733

From"Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
Date2015-08-06 15:50 +0200
Message-ID<pUtIt-271-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1200950

On 8/5/2015 9:13 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Aug, at 05:10:00PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Aug, at 08:58:52AM, Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, absolutely. It has been in my mind, sorry I was tied up in the last
>>> few days. I wonder what I may missed, I certainly do x86 build test with
>>> versions of the patch set.
>>>
>>> I will try today and report back.
>>
>> No problem.
>>
>> I'd suggest moving the implementation into include/acpi/apei.h and
>> leaving it as static inline instead of implementing it out of line in
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/apei.c.
>
> Yeah, I didn't mean include/acpi/apei.h but the architecture-specific
> equivalent.
>
Thank you Matt. It builds well on x86 with default configuration, but
not if APEI feature is turned on. This is my fault.
I just sent a new version of the patch set out.

-- 
Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1200951

FromMatt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date2015-08-05 18:20 +0200
Message-ID<pU9A5-6u8-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1200935
On Wed, 05 Aug, at 08:58:52AM, Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong wrote:
> 
> Yes, absolutely. It has been in my mind, sorry I was tied up in the last
> few days. I wonder what I may missed, I certainly do x86 build test with
> versions of the patch set.
> 
> I will try today and report back.

No problem.

I'd suggest moving the implementation into include/acpi/apei.h and
leaving it as static inline instead of implementing it out of line in
arch/x86/kernel/acpi/apei.c.

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1200570

FromMatt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date2015-08-05 11:30 +0200
Message-ID<pU3bk-5xL-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1199405
On Tue, 04 Aug, at 06:25:52AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 05:23:54PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > Rafael, Boris?
> 
> The ghes.c change looks fine I guess. The whole patchset makes sense
> now, with the arch bits extracted. So
> 
> Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
 
Thanks Boris.

> However, we probably should work towards adhering to EFI memory
> attributes on x86, long term, as we talked. But that's a future thing.

Yeah, it's on my TODO list.

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web