From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
james.morse@arm.com, shiju.jose@huawei.com,
geliangtang@gmail.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the error
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170731170017.2vwxhewivgpyvpea@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fd826be1-50b0-1f82-3fb3-a32a356c45c4@codeaurora.org>
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 10:15:27AM -0600, Baicar, Tyler wrote:
> I think the better thing to do in this case is still send the ack. If
> ghes_read_estatus() fails, then
> either we are unable to read the estatus or the estatus is empty/invalid.
Right now we silently handle that failure of ghes_read_estatus(). That
might be hiding some Linux bugs if we are calling ghes_proc() in cases
where we shouldn't.
Perhaps we should have something like this, so if systems do start acting
weirdly there will be a note that we took this path:
rc = ghes_read_estatus(ghes, 0);
if (rc) {
pr_notice("surprise failure reading ghes estatus\n");
goto out;
}
> If we do not send the ack, then we will be in a scenario where FW will not
> send any more errors.
We might ACK something that the firmware didn't send, which may
lead to other problems.
> I think it would be better to still have the FW send the errors and kernel
> complain about issues with
But I agree with this. We should send the ACK. Luckliy this doesn't have
a long legacy problem because the whole ACK mechanism is a new thing. So
we only have to worry about GHESv2 supporting BIOS.
-Tony
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-31 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-28 22:25 [PATCH] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the error Tyler Baicar
2017-07-29 6:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-31 16:15 ` Baicar, Tyler
2017-07-31 17:00 ` Luck, Tony [this message]
2017-07-31 17:44 ` Baicar, Tyler
2017-08-03 22:06 ` Baicar, Tyler
2017-07-31 17:11 ` James Morse
2017-07-31 17:57 ` Baicar, Tyler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170731170017.2vwxhewivgpyvpea@intel.com \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=geliangtang@gmail.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=shiju.jose@huawei.com \
--cc=tbaicar@codeaurora.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox