From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, Vikram Sethi <vsethi@nvidia.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@oss.qualcomm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Shuai Xue <xueshuai@linux.alibaba.com>,
Maciej Wieczor-Retman <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>,
Pawel Chmielewski <pawel.chmielewski@intel.com>,
Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
wanghuiqiang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: RFC: ACPI code first proposal, _OSC to negotiate use of Memory Section 2 CPER.
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2026 12:00:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261031120053.0141d7ab@foz.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261030143802.0000231d@oss.qualcomm.com>
On Fri, 30 Oct 2026 14:38:02 -0700
Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@oss.qualcomm.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> In the discussion of Pierre's patch #1 the question of how a firmware
> could know to send the newer Memory Error Section 2 CPER rather than the
> older record given it currently has no way of knowing what the OS supports.
>
> Having discussed the problem inside Qualcomm, we can to the same conclusion
> as in Pierre's thread - an _OSC is probably the easiest way to solve this.
> Andrei then drew up a code first ECN proposal. The text is below, tweaked
> for plain text rendering. Link to proposal #2
>
> Please draw the attention of others to this. Feedback welcome either on
> this thread, Pierre's thread or directly on the tianocore ticket.
This sounds to be the best approach on my eyes.
>
> thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> # Title: OS support for CPER Memory Error Section 2 records
> ## Status: Draft
> ## Document: ACPI Specification Version 6.6
> ## License: SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-4.0
> ## Submitters: Qualcomm
>
> ## Summary of the change
> Reserves an additional Platform-Wide OSPM Capability bit to negotiate supported CPER
> record format for Memory Error Section (older MES vs newer and richer MES2).
> Memory Error Section 2 records are defined in UEFI 2.11, Section N.2.6 (Appendix N, page
> 2171).
>
> ## Benefits of the change
> Memory Error Section 2 (MES2) records were added in UEFI Specification 2.11, yet no
> mechanism to negotiate OSPM support for the new record type (Linux kernel support is still
> being added upstream at the moment).
>
> This change proposes using a new Platform-Wide OSPM Capability to negotiate between
> firmware and the OS for enabling the new format. Until the added _OSC bit is reported by
> OSPM, the older Memory Error Section records will be used. Although this means a platform
> may in practice have to support generating both record formats, this is seen as a better than
> always emitting old- and new- style records which would leave the
> deduplication/reconciliation up to OSPM.
>
> ## Impact of the change
> Platform firmware should only generate CPER MES2 records if OSPM declared support for
> MES2 records. Otherwise, platform firmware should only generate the older MES records.
>
> ## Detailed description of the change [normative updates]
>
>
> 6.2.11.2 Platform-Wide OSPM Capabilities
> …
>
> Table 6.13: Platform-Wide _OSC Capabilities DWORD 2
> +---------+--------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
> | Bits | Field Name | Definition |
> +---------+--------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
> | … | | |
> +---------+--------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
> | 22 | Functional Fixed | The OS sets this bit to indicate support for |
> | | Hardware | the usage of Functional FixedHardware |
> | | | (FFixedHW) OperationRegions. |
> +---------+--------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
> | 23 | CPER Memory Error | The OS sets this bit to indicate support for |
> | | Section 2 Support | MES2 CPER records. If not set, OS support for |
> | | | older CPER MES records is assumed. |
> +---------+--------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
> | 31:24 | | Reserved (must be 0) |
> +---------+--------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
My only concern is that it may run out of bits soon if we use those
for each new incompatible types on CPER records.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20261019203915.2019037-1-pierre.gondois@arm.com/
> [2] https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/issues/13430
>
>
Thanks,
Mauro
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-31 11:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-30 21:38 RFC: ACPI code first proposal, _OSC to negotiate use of Memory Section 2 CPER Jonathan Cameron
2026-10-31 11:00 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab [this message]
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=20261031120053.0141d7ab@foz.lan \
--to=mchehab+huawei@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=ashok.raj@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com \
--cc=pawel.chmielewski@intel.com \
--cc=pierre.gondois@arm.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=vsethi@nvidia.com \
--cc=wanghuiqiang@huawei.com \
--cc=xueshuai@linux.alibaba.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