lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Feb]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH V8 06/10] acpi: apei: panic OS with fatal error status block
From
Date
On 2/15/2017 5:13 AM, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Tyler,
>
> On 13/02/17 22:45, Baicar, Tyler wrote:
>> On 2/9/2017 3:48 AM, James Morse wrote:
>>> On 01/02/17 17:16, Tyler Baicar wrote:
>>>> From: "Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang" <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
>>>>
>>>> Even if an error status block's severity is fatal, the kernel does not
>>>> honor the severity level and panic.
>>>>
>>>> With the firmware first model, the platform could inform the OS about a
>>>> fatal hardware error through the non-NMI GHES notification type. The OS
>>>> should panic when a hardware error record is received with this
>>>> severity.
>>>>
>>>> Call panic() after CPER data in error status block is printed if
>>>> severity is fatal, before each error section is handled.
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>>>> index 8756172..86c1f15 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>>>> @@ -687,6 +689,13 @@ static int ghes_ack_error(struct acpi_hest_generic_v2
>>>> *generic_v2)
>>>> return rc;
>>>> }
>>>> +static void __ghes_call_panic(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> + if (panic_timeout == 0)
>>>> + panic_timeout = ghes_panic_timeout;
>>>> + panic("Fatal hardware error!");
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>> __ghes_panic() also has:
>>>> __ghes_print_estatus(KERN_EMERG, ghes->generic, ghes->estatus);
>>> Which prints this estatus regardless of rate limiting and cache-ing.
> [...]
>
>>>> ghes_estatus_cache_add(ghes->generic, ghes->estatus);
>>>> }
>>>> + if (ghes_severity(ghes->estatus->error_severity) >= GHES_SEV_PANIC) {
>>>> + __ghes_call_panic();
>>>> + }
>>> I think this ghes_severity() then panic() should go above the:
>>>> if (!ghes_estatus_cached(ghes->estatus)) {
>>> and we should call __ghes_print_estatus() here too, to make sure the message
>>> definitely got out!
>
>> Okay, that makes sense. If we move this up, is there a problem with calling
>> __ghes_panic() instead of making the __ghes_print_estatus() and
>> __ghes_call_panic() calls here? It looks like that will just add a call to
>> oops_begin() and ghes_print_queued_estatus() as well, but this is what
>> ghes_notify_nmi() does if the severity is panic.
>
> I don't think the queued stuff is relevant, isn't that just for x86-NMI messages
> that it doesn't print out directly?
>
> A quick grep shows arm64 doesn't have oops_begin(), you may have to add some
> equivalent mechanism. Lets try and avoid that rabbit hole!
>
> Given __ghes_panic() calls __ghes_print_estatus() too, you could try moving that
> into your new __ghes_call_panic().... or whatever results in the least lines
> changed!
Sounds good, I will just use __ghes_print_estatus() and __ghes_call_panic().

Thanks,
Tyler

--
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.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-02-15 18:08    [W:0.094 / U:3.724 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site