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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1410456 > unrolled thread

RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: Do not use bank 1 for APEI generated error logs.

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] x86/mce: Do not use bank 1 for APEI generated error  logs. "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com> - 2016-05-31 19:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Do not use bank 1 for APEI generated error logs. Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2016-05-31 20:10 +0200
      RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: Do not use bank 1 for APEI generated error  logs. "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com> - 2016-05-31 20:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Do not use bank 1 for APEI generated error logs. Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2016-06-03 10:30 +0200

#1410456 — RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: Do not use bank 1 for APEI generated error logs.

>> -	m.bank = 1;
>> +	m.bank = mca_cfg.banks;
>
> There's struct cper_sec_mem_err.bank. Why aren't we copying that?

Because that is DDR3/DDR4 "bank" (internal DIMM detail) as opposed to machine check "bank"
(CPU microarchitecture detail).  We need the latter here.

-Tony

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1410507 — Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Do not use bank 1 for APEI generated error logs.

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 05:11:45PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> Because that is DDR3/DDR4 "bank" (internal DIMM detail) as opposed
> to machine check "bank" (CPU microarchitecture detail). We need the
> latter here.

Ok, I see.

Btw, would it have any benefit of writing a "magic" value in m.bank
to denote the error comes from APEI instead of number of banks which
differs betweem generations?

Something like

	m.bank = -1;

or so?

255 banks will never happen anyway! (Famous last words ... :-)))

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.

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

#1410515

> Btw, would it have any benefit of writing a "magic" value in m.bank
> to denote the error comes from APEI instead of number of banks which
> differs between generations?
>
> Something like
>
>	m.bank = -1;
>
> or so?

That might be a bit more obvious than my subtle "one more than possible
on this platform" magic number.

> 255 banks will never happen anyway! (Famous last words ... :-)))

Intel is stuck at 32 unless we come up with a new mechanism and change
all the code that generates MSR numbers with "base + 4*i". There are
some virtualization MSRs allocated at what would be bank32.

-Tony

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

#1412916 — Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Do not use bank 1 for APEI generated error logs.

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 06:18:42PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> Intel is stuck at 32 unless we come up with a new mechanism and change
> all the code that generates MSR numbers with "base + 4*i". There are
> some virtualization MSRs allocated at what would be bank32.

Just when I was hoping that 32 banks should be more than enough and hw
people would restrain themselves. Looks like a "natural" restraint has
presented itself ... :-))

Anyway, v2 applied, thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web