From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=205.220.168.131 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793638703; b=GQZy3C+mcQPVhMrwxuUviIwXLASd6vG/5gyCfc6VA3ah+pwn3fAtynNuSarICqY9Alv4 W9G6enUNvc0O0a9JXL0NZPr4TeLuDaJ1jwa8Fp4JVOGsmNUrafgjuojHVf4LFIId6GXPh D1OME1YhP980jPKLJDIdFXdwSWloxA3JRjZvXRefNg6MVubCw4Z7xK37WzJuJgnvO+QVJ kEHoBplrJLsvZ1S3VYS0ojtQkCyMcObtLKJn/lx9DWdnqSgcAMDrMYldzdmm3Q1cnMPF5 1x/UdjmvPPrMFO9ML1dlQDVH1YR3al8JVnqnNIYM6x3rtRgEMyOj7deC+fggQHQsqXg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793638703; h=DMARC-Filter:Received:DKIM-Signature:Received:Received: DKIM-Signature:X-Google-DKIM-Signature:X-Forwarded-Encrypted: X-Gm-Message-State:X-Gm-Gg:X-Received:X-Received:Received:Date:From: To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Organization:X-Mailer: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID:X-Authority-Analysis: X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc:X-Proofpoint-GUID: X-Proofpoint-Spam-Info:X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details; bh=PzJGXubz8ItkEzPUWY/nEgW+2q4rBpwlu9LIiqUJd14=; b=KwUQEn2QBs6W0tzRETykyVZ5ZfjRhXnWsw3/MgdlAsYl4wGzmr+Yx8RLmQ5XfQsTlnzH Jf9poOOzVs4E1M0QbxuVHBK8oPMendP1pmVCVOpcc6JLdVFHPcEw/si4Sg4zmhlXrLA9w coUtA2ep5vTYIYH925Tzzrq35Dfow5zfFfkh8Pg0g/u4j76YNZjXuEQu1hHZx54FbvfJe 6PHBpcgMZq0wXuWoG+C6amdkFrwldBBK9QYb1ecGs1XJw0Jz0xurdsiPdt0pQNbf13L8b Fve9xAnF8VObJLvn5P/waqhhaClo2XGGhDopCBJCMMkWmCEfviOJoimHcJW7ewAh2Bg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=oss.qualcomm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oss.qualcomm.com; dkim=pass header.d=qualcomm.com header.i=@qualcomm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=qcppdkim1 header.b=dUN+m8HR; dkim=pass header.d=oss.qualcomm.com header.i=@oss.qualcomm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=google header.b=jgUKC03J; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=205.220.168.131 Received: from mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com [205.220.168.131]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90DF9607BD24 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2026 16:58:22 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 90DF9607BD24 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=oss.qualcomm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oss.qualcomm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=qualcomm.com header.i=@qualcomm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=qcppdkim1 header.b=dUN+m8HR; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=oss.qualcomm.com header.i=@oss.qualcomm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=google header.b=jgUKC03J Received: from pps.filterd (m0279867.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 6A2GYstv1222685 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2026 16:58:22 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=qualcomm.com; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=qcppdkim1; bh= PzJGXubz8ItkEzPUWY/nEgW+2q4rBpwlu9LIiqUJd14=; b=dUN+m8HRQemx+JdO 1Kq3YwsYqp2TrSKgPY3P1b0kRCoBuWIs3Jmhjw9Q8gtZ1DVoVEYtMHmPpysXpt4w 2jye2Swznblo03xfDawI44V2DSeCGRIdhtk4c0QMmUvnt7CubrvLmcqHad7A9dI2 l47x1f43RQlT/GnjWbzy6uWjN/f/oHGSzef/u4Pb3y5VnoRGgwYBKLGfSOTrU3A8 GKjFkluaUCa64y+XRLVyOFPp0OUmNFrLg5VOQZqarjK5ejjJB8Ll0yFQHZut9DES 2geDkoysbL7Qgq9sBB+kIlBDsfPg3EM1adQ/FoU5j/rLejnBs7mADF+8eDk0jcbc 0DSp1Q== Received: from mail-dy1-f198.google.com (mail-dy1-f198.google.com [74.125.82.198]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4hpmf1tst3-1 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2026 16:58:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: by mail-dy1-f198.google.com with SMTP id 5a478bee46e88-36a190c53a3so4394122eec.0 for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2026 08:58:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oss.qualcomm.com; s=google; t=1793638701; x=1794243501; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:mime-version:organization :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=PzJGXubz8ItkEzPUWY/nEgW+2q4rBpwlu9LIiqUJd14=; b=jgUKC03J1qarY0z2tMlQ+AQIMT7+TGTKktzZXZdn9i9PTXj12XBUa+Ml1slAzDHPoK 2sbO6VEwN6BDayzFHVe/o4s2CJ5Brr3tU/6AfDnASg9/bCsIFT+t1M35aWE4AygS7TXr fE32PjksDn7lITqgfGyGAi+s5jNI4lm0GP7k/fX2xHXPTpVJjo+VdFCYWrwamJpPlnSO no5xLZZF9TGa+Luabiq+Xr9PZTxM96ZAL7hTx0ZiFtsrIsj3/SmYW4wg/WEjeyzDqroZ L2m8D0a6eEKz+sGU6jK7vnr4EpTAdzxZlqhRHL+qtxD8eR5w9269dXyl0eSo+aJq1/d/ E22g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1793638701; x=1794243501; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:mime-version:organization :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=PzJGXubz8ItkEzPUWY/nEgW+2q4rBpwlu9LIiqUJd14=; b=HJ5OzgEFP2ET9tp37zGkto8XagssztdvA8kBXVkhDFGgvCnH6DkFs92uR02OMEnPkX X6Uh1l+YuEkHk9nmGKdBOBFnWPD5vMb3Dql25HtDTA/Q3WbC402jgudPownR4kF/BNG+ vX97ccatO51BaKvS0Mitt//EJIpXIBWU73JGRHB4KdZ4tZwr1y2jGB9vppMzTy3Z1V0b n/0nSx5kaA/ndkf9cNbrAa5p+ZPj+4c7j9+BE5aSPleZ/3G+hYN8J2PE0IYMG2sDgX3a q+DkSKSzo0NjSCj3bJac9eCKeBbTchS8MbB84bLxI5iNtc0qqaSAyWfYldiZQ/PQ8Pve E8ww== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBwwJwVUqzC24gkd4bVvugiea/Qkt38IgLG9rPBeRgR+E/qIIij+aj+wMz9fs4QufhZHbIxlk0lctHXr@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFq9FYIMTRqAgyOtA3lCi4IW5awsMf7yaGOkl99QmpcvYH+K99F4h0YS 5eSIxnCciaI0B3Pf7Qhq+ap+IEvk5T7qZFUcooHkfWvhTbpyWvZx+5W2g8Wq53j4S/nW7f3opMD KPnvehufT4LcVqOrrb0c2XNYFTL2jdIfcRpymN30hZ4ujbf3z+qvyIM65alMAite9 X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou0MgB0W7b2l0azzt9GHY7Pl/Y/f+sgTuetsroe4cuYwAMrf2RsDeT7z0CJI1P9 JbRXznpjMbqhTfL42aaYUprJTHWSAFrekrKuPGxCbCHpPIrCgzTZpXkbcfy470745CgW2HmcERH VEvWaEVOuwF6EOtZv/z9p7Zbi2L12tiDBE/6O9eo9jzqodrAcYSaBthsmG94YVMv6eJEvNdM6CI uYlZIh4s/VOmfvZtzKQhXdDamOv77onVAxJx7u2qd0cBezOLwSGM976dy5LjCbG2k63lzre9kO3 /lNIENIWWQZEyv7/FSLeMQKShRywDB9RPhB8xxuPDLIWuzrkqv482SU01c6nV3Icz58QWjcZv99 FTOq1SFIqOycm+N0ei5abnB7NfU8CyEa69OcDObXenCOoch+oPwSRhUc1G4Jw+/YpID7KstL8ML rQqgCqoSxQkZ/Lv3XhKSVYNwf0Vkg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:693c:864d:10b0:362:2e2f:c261 with SMTP id 5a478bee46e88-36a3b5fdb1bmr19288529eec.27.1793638700560; Mon, 02 Nov 2026 08:58:20 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a05:693c:864d:10b0:362:2e2f:c261 with SMTP id 5a478bee46e88-36a3b5fdb1bmr19288478eec.27.1793638699826; Mon, 02 Nov 2026 08:58:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (i-global254.qualcomm.com. [199.106.103.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5a478bee46e88-36a4291e38fsm44938189eec.15.2026.11.02.08.58.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 02 Nov 2026 08:58:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2026 08:58:15 -0800 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Pierre Gondois Cc: Ashok Raj , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Tony Luck , Borislav Petkov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, James Morse , Mark Brown , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Shuai Xue , Maciej Wieczor-Retman , Pawel Chmielewski , Dave Jiang , "Fabio M. De Francesco" , Breno Leitao , Dan Williams , Terry Bowman , Ard Biesheuvel , Morduan Zang , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev, Ashok Raj Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] CPER: Add Memory Error Section 2 support Message-ID: <20261102085815.00002239@oss.qualcomm.com> In-Reply-To: <3718c5fa-88de-471b-89f5-4cba15975a49@arm.com> References: <20261019203915.2019037-1-pierre.gondois@arm.com> <20261020101048.00000186@oss.qualcomm.com> <0817615d-5e96-4a3a-b39e-3e5d1b88e716@arm.com> <20261023142621.00007051@oss.qualcomm.com> <20261024003917.283b890d@foz.lan> <20261023170405.000060b8@oss.qualcomm.com> <43301529-f169-493c-bc59-fa08b77e1ef3@arm.com> <20261030081941.000040e7@oss.qualcomm.com> <20261030144013.0000320e@oss.qualcomm.com> <3718c5fa-88de-471b-89f5-4cba15975a49@arm.com> Organization: Qualcomm X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.4.0 (GTK 3.24.51; x86_64-w64-mingw32) X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: V44-ofmBaithKT8I_Sy_Wg6jzK-AQhhW X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=bNaDs/+Z c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6ae8c12d cx=c_pps a=wEP8DlPgTf/vqF+yE6f9lg==:117 a=JYp8KDb2vCoCEuGobkYCKw==:17 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=zJRp6_cAMcgA:10 a=s4-Qcg_JpJYA:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=u7WPNUs3qKkmUXheDGA7:22 a=eoimf2acIAo5FJnRuUoq:22 a=VwQbUJbxAAAA:8 a=EUspDBNiAAAA:8 a=7CQSdrXTAAAA:8 a=eIcoSznhEi4KaPes0yMA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=bBxd6f-gb0O0v-kibOvt:22 a=a-qgeE7W1pNrGK8U0ZQC:22 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjYxMTAyMDA2NyBTYWx0ZWRfX1LD/r8977U/D diNW/YrpByY4wdk40Wrc/HFXG2qTZw9P5w00WqM22uBCysYO00MWG1XFOzxT0x86SIWXdeqaCom ZvuGE85mOP1Z+jAF9LYZpg9VtDww/7zYsXxuSR1XWuArfJM2840ulkCGoUW3ZCRS5wqctAnHif4 SW+w2w/FiJ2SMRqs/qxWxqXuvx14t2scXNJoRtMjKavNsCtd9OVlnBJtLG5R8hxwNWXD65SjXhr AxvWHnjk//58Dfd0ZPC8QWJqACoRME3VdApVLmfLrGDE4co+O9eDzfQUPMx/WRq4J3RU/Co/ELZ /GXfR4E4qF0k2Q2qNxstjfOBEc9ARWTVomisJot3YCa1qtPPZoYog2M9hNrrmxQoylw+2ixhI/P jmCEq9pfNILqetEhdjcFxWI64BBLyXTybg+OqswYLuUorPONIcZAimTg0KcwG5O8c3j44omJiXH FewcF9n8mjjKouepYSg== X-Proofpoint-GUID: V44-ofmBaithKT8I_Sy_Wg6jzK-AQhhW X-Proofpoint-Spam-Info: AW1haW4tMjYxMTAyMDA2NyBTYWx0ZWRfXwb4agi1q3b8n LRsUv6myhkRdo26+MQpMsOiYxdkk/d28/vbcpEDgLPUQH2STuMJ0CzbGsnm1hiHgW1WnltQrzxP TPdERAyTrf/tOVoqicrPQR0G1Xtn+t8= X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1176,Hydra:6.1.138,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-11-02_04,2026-11-02_03,2025-10-01_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.22.0-2610300000 definitions=main-2611020067 On Mon, 2 Nov 2026 12:33:16 +0100 Pierre Gondois wrote: > On 10/30/26 22:40, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Oct 2026 18:16:06 +0100 > > Pierre Gondois wrote: > > =20 > >> On 10/30/26 16:19, Jonathan Cameron wrote: =20 > >>> On Fri, 30 Oct 2026 12:51:47 +0100 > >>> Pierre Gondois wrote: > >>> =20 > >>>> On 10/25/26 00:05, Ashok Raj wrote: =20 > >>>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2026 at 05:04:05PM -0700, Jonathan Cameron wrote: = =20 > >>>>>> On Sat, 24 Oct 2026 00:40:33 +0200 > >>>>>> Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >>>>>> =20 > >>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 14:26:21 -0700 > >>>>>>> Jonathan Cameron wrote: > >>>>>>> =20 > >>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2026 09:07:25 +0200 > >>>>>>>> Pierre Gondois wrote: > >>>>>>>> =20 > >>>>>>>>> On 10/20/26 19:10, Jonathan Cameron wrote: =20 > >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2026 22:38:39 +0200 > >>>>>>>>>> Pierre Gondois wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> =20 > >>>>>>>>>>> The support is mostly duplicated from Memory Error Section ha= ndling. > >>>>>>>>>>> Other than differences coming from the content of Memory Err= or > >>>>>>>>>>> Section 1 and 2, differences in the support are: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> - v2 do not rely on a compact "struct cper_mem_err_compact" s= truct. > >>>>>>>>>>> This structure was used to support older versions of the Memo= ry > >>>>>>>>>>> Error Section (1). This is not needed for the new structure. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> - The compact version is also used by the tracing framework. > >>>>>>>>>>> To avoid relying and propagating a non-standard record format, > >>>>>>>>>>> through trace event (cf. extlog_mem event) the new trace event > >>>>>>>>>>> prints each field individually. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The last patch of the serie was only build-tested due to the > >>>>>>>>>>> absence of relevant hardware. apei_mce_report_mem_error() and > >>>>>>>>>>> arch_apei_report_mem_error() implementations were also remove= d since > >>>>>>>>>>> last version. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> It will also require a proper handling from the rasdaemon. Ap= plying > >>>>>>>>>>> this last patch without rasdaemon support will silent the rep= orts of > >>>>>>>>>>> Memory Error Section 2 error, cf. ras_userspace_consumers() c= heck. =20 > >>>>>>>>>> Hi Pierre, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I'd slow down a bit. We are mid merge window and convention i= s normally > >>>>>>>>>> one version a week or so anyway. Better to gather up feedback= from > >>>>>>>>>> a number of folk and spin only one revision to cover it all. > >>>>>>>>>> =20 > >>>>>>>>> Hello Jonathan, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Ok sure, as the v1 was reviewed quickly I thought there was a c= hance > >>>>>>>>> of having the serie accepted quickly aswell. I ll wait a bit mo= re. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the review, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Pierre > >>>>>>>>> =20 > >>>>>>>> A general question that came up in a related thread with one of > >>>>>>>> our RAS architects. How does firmware decide what to send? As f= ar as > >>>>>>>> I can tell firwmare has no way to know whether the OS understand= s the CPER > >>>>>>>> Memory Section 2. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> So options that come to mind. > >>>>>>>> 1. Firmware must send a CPER with both Memory Section and Memory= Section 2. =20 > >>>>>>> Please don't do this: this would require either Kernespace or use= rspace to > >>>>>>> discard one of the reports, only if the other one is there, which= can be > >>>>>>> tricky. Could be done more easily at userspace, but only if some = database > >>>>>>> support is enabled, but, at least on rasdaemon, this is an option= al module. =20 > >>>>>> Good. That confirms my view that is horrible. =20 > >>>>> Hi Jonathan, > >>>>> > >>>>> I agree that an _OSC capability is the right long-term solution. > >>>>> > >>>>> Firmware should select one native CPER format based on OS support, = rather > >>>>> than emit both Section 1 and Section 2 and leave deduplication to t= he OS > >>>>> or userspace. > >>>>> > >>>>> For a Section 2-capable kernel, we may still avoid a second GHES no= tifier > >>>>> chain: preserve the existing struct cper_sec_mem_err * contract and= give > >>>>> it a lossy Section 1 projection of a Section 2 record. The conversi= on must > >>>>> translate validation bits and clear validity for values that cannot= be > >>>>> represented, rather than truncate them. =20 > >>>> I understand we might want to emit a new extlog_mem2_event and a los= sy > >>>> extlog_mem_event for legacy userspace, but I'm not sure to follow how > >>>> you want to do it. > >>>> > >>>> Do you suggest that we only need one notifier (ghes_report_mem_chain) > >>>> and that we should not add ghes_report_mem2_chain ? This would mean > >>>> that the .notifier_call (=3D ghes_edac_report_mem_error) should hand= le > >>>> both cper_sec_mem_err/cper_sec_mem_err2 struct. > >>>> > >>>> Another solution would be to keep the ghes_report_mem2_chain, > >>>> which would be responsible of creating the lossy v1 struct and > >>>> triggering the original ghes_report_mem_chain. =20 >=20 > [1] Not sure about the outcome of the above. Needs input from the RAS maintainers etc - particularly on x86. >=20 > >>>> =20 > >>>>> That preserves legacy EDAC consumers, but cannot carry all Section = 2 data. > >>>>> Updated userspace needs the native Section 2 payload through a > >>>>> full-fidelity path, such as the existing GUID-tagged raw CPER event. > >>>>> > >>>>> This does mean an updated userspace listener may receive both the l= egacy > >>>>> EDAC summary and the raw Section 2 record for the same firmware err= or. > >>>>> They are two kernel views, not two firmware reports. We should ther= efore > >>>>> add a shared GHES record/section ID to both events, so userspace can > >>>>> correlate them reliably; address and timestamp are not sufficient. > >>>>> > >>>>> So _OSC solves firmware selection for old versus new kernels, while= a > >>>>> Section 1 projection plus the raw payload handles legacy versus upd= ated > >>>>> consumers on a new kernel. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thoughts? =20 > >>>> This will put more burden on the firmware, but this seems the right > >>>> thing to do. I ll share the thread with the group working more close= ly > >>>> on the architecture aswell, =20 > >>> We have will have a code first proposal for the _OSC part shortly. Ju= st going > >>> through internal review. I'll make sure you + others here are on the= +CC. =20 > >> Ok thanks, > >> If you can also also add Mark Brown > >> =20 > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20261030143802.0000231d@oss.qualcomm= .com/ > > > > I started a new thread so it wasn't too buried. =20 >=20 > Thanks ! >=20 > Just to be sure, the _OSC=A0discussion should not prevent this patchset > to proceed right ? I think there is only [1] which I m not sure about the > outcome otherwise, It doesn't prevent this going forwards, but reality is I think no platform is going to surface any Memory Section 2 errors until we have the _OSC. =20 It should be a trivial addition though to pop the _OSC assuming we get it in the spec. thanks, Jonathan >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Pierre >=20