Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 Oct 2013 21:35:19 -0400 | From | Chen Gong <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/8] ACPI, APEI, CPER: Add UEFI 2.4 support for memory error |
| |
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:56:25PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote: > Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 22:56:25 +0530 > From: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > To: "Chen, Gong" <gong.chen@linux.intel.com> > Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, bp@alien8.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, > linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] ACPI, APEI, CPER: Add UEFI 2.4 support for memory > error > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) > > On 2013/10/11 02:32AM, Chen Gong wrote: > > In latest UEFI spec(by now it is 2.4) memory error definition > > for CPER (UEFI 2.4 Appendix N Common Platform Error Record) > > adds some new fields. These fields help people to locate > > memory error on actual DIMM location. > > > > Original-author: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Chen, Gong <gong.chen@linux.intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/acpi/apei/cper.c | 3 ++- > > include/linux/cper.h | 7 +++++++ > > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/cper.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/cper.c > > index b2e4134..680230c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/cper.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/cper.c > > @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ > > * various tables, such as ERST, BERT and HEST etc. > > * > > * For more information about CPER, please refer to Appendix N of UEFI > > - * Specification version 2.3. > > + * Specification version 2.4. > > * > > * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > > * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version > > @@ -191,6 +191,7 @@ static const char *cper_mem_err_type_strs[] = { > > "memory sparing", > > "scrub corrected error", > > "scrub uncorrected error", > > + "Physical Memory Map-out event", > > All small letters to match the rest of the items: > "physical memory map-out event" >
sure, of course.
> > }; > > > > static void cper_print_mem(const char *pfx, const struct cper_sec_mem_err *mem) > > diff --git a/include/linux/cper.h b/include/linux/cper.h > > index c230494..bd01c9a 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/cper.h > > +++ b/include/linux/cper.h > > @@ -232,6 +232,9 @@ enum { > > #define CPER_MEM_VALID_RESPONDER_ID 0x1000 > > #define CPER_MEM_VALID_TARGET_ID 0x2000 > > #define CPER_MEM_VALID_ERROR_TYPE 0x4000 > > +#define CPER_MEM_VALID_RANK_NUMBER 0x8000 > > +#define CPER_MEM_VALID_CARD_HANDLE 0x10000 > > +#define CPER_MEM_VALID_MODULE_HANDLE 0x20000 > > > > #define CPER_PCIE_VALID_PORT_TYPE 0x0001 > > #define CPER_PCIE_VALID_VERSION 0x0002 > > @@ -347,6 +350,10 @@ struct cper_sec_mem_err { > > __u64 responder_id; > > __u64 target_id; > > __u8 error_type; > > + __u8 reserved; > > + __u16 rank; > > + __u16 mem_array_handle; > > + __u16 mem_dev_handle; > > Nit: could you name those fields similar to what the spec has: > card_handle and module_handle, with perhaps a comment to indicate > relationship to SMBIOS type 16/17 tables? > > On the contrary, what I'm thinking is reserve these names but adding comments for what it is in the spec. I consider a reasonable name is more meaningful than just following the spec strictly.
> Regards, > Naveen > > > }; > > > > struct cper_sec_pcie { > > -- > > 1.8.4.rc3 > > > [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |