lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] acpi, apei: use appropriate pgprot_t to map GHES memory

* Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Aug, at 10:27:22AM, Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang wrote:
> > From: "Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > If the ACPI APEI firmware handles hardware error first (called "firmware
> > first handling"), the firmware updates the GHES memory region with hardware
> > error record (called "generic hardware error record"). Essentially the
> > firmware writes hardware error records in the GHES memory region, triggers
> > an NMI/interrupt, then the GHES driver goes off and grabs the error record
> > from the GHES region.
> >
> > The kernel currently maps the GHES memory region as cacheable
> > (PAGE_KERNEL) for all architectures. However, on some arm64 platforms,
> > there is a mismatch between how the kernel maps the GHES region
> > (PAGE_KERNEL) and how the firmware maps it (EFI_MEMORY_UC, ie.
> > uncacheable), leading to the possibility of the kernel GHES driver
> > reading stale data from the cache when it receives the interrupt.
> >
> > With stale data being read, the kernel is unaware there is new hardware
> > error to be handled when there actually is; this may lead to further damage
> > in various scenarios, such as error propagation caused data corruption.
> > If uncorrected error (such as double bit ECC error) happened in memory
> > operation and if the kernel is unaware of such event happening, errorneous
> > data may be propagated to the disk.
> >
> > Instead GHES memory region should be mapped with page protection type
> > according to what is returned from arch_apei_get_mem_attribute().
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
> > Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 10 +++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> This patch message looks fine to me. Ingo?

Looks good to me too!

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-04 14:01    [W:0.043 / U:0.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site