[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[fu.wei at linaro.org]

From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>

This commit provides APEI arch-specific bits for aarch64

Meanwhile, add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for
"acpi_disable_cmcff" which is used by IA-32 Architecture
Corrected Machine Check (CMC).

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
---
Changelog:
v4: Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc4).
    Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one into header file as a inline function
    Add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".

v3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/3/521
    Remove "acpi_disable_cmcff" from arm64 code,
    and wrap it in hest.c by "#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)"

v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/2/432
    Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc3).
    Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c

v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/8/14/199
    Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/include/asm/apci.h.
    Delete arch/arm64/kernel/apei.c.
    Add "#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".

 arch/arm64/Kconfig            |  1 +
 arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h |  5 +++++
 drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c      | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
index 871f217..58c8992 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ config ARM64
 	select ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED if ACPI
 	select ACPI_GENERIC_GSI if ACPI
 	select ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY if ACPI
+	select HAVE_ACPI_APEI if ACPI
 	select ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC64_DEC_IF_POSITIVE
 	select ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE
 	select ARCH_HAS_GCOV_PROFILE_ALL
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
index caafd63..31d3d9a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
 
 #include <asm/cputype.h>
 #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
+#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
 
 /* Macros for consistency checks of the GICC subtable of MADT */
 #define ACPI_MADT_GICC_LENGTH	\
@@ -94,6 +95,10 @@ static inline const char *acpi_get_enable_method(int cpu)
 
 #ifdef	CONFIG_ACPI_APEI
 pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr);
+static inline void arch_apei_flush_tlb_one(unsigned long addr)
+{
+	flush_tlb_kernel_range(addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE);
+}
 #endif
 
 #endif /*_ASM_ACPI_H*/
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
index 20b3fcf..715c58b 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
@@ -117,15 +117,27 @@ int apei_hest_parse(apei_hest_func_t func, void *data)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(apei_hest_parse);
 
+#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
 /*
  * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to be set
  * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
  */
 static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr, void *data)
 {
-	return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
+	if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
+		return !arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
+
+	return 0;
 }
 
+static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void)
+{
+	return apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_cmc, NULL);
+}
+#else
+static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void) { return 0; }
+#endif
+
 struct ghes_arr {
 	struct platform_device **ghes_devs;
 	unsigned int count;
@@ -232,8 +244,9 @@ void __init acpi_hest_init(void)
 		goto err;
 	}
 
-	if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
-		apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_cmc, NULL);
+	rc = hest_ia_init();
+	if (rc)
+		goto err;
 
 	if (!ghes_disable) {
 		rc = apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_ghes_count, &ghes_count);
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Hanjun Guo]

Hi Fu Wei,

On 12/08/2015 03:03 PM, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>
> This commit provides APEI arch-specific bits for aarch64
>
> Meanwhile, add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for
> "acpi_disable_cmcff" which is used by IA-32 Architecture
> Corrected Machine Check (CMC).
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
> Tested-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> ---
> Changelog:
> v4: Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc4).
>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one into header file as a inline function
>      Add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
>
> v3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/3/521
>      Remove "acpi_disable_cmcff" from arm64 code,
>      and wrap it in hest.c by "#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)"
>
> v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/2/432
>      Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc3).
>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c
>
> v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/8/14/199
>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/include/asm/apci.h.
>      Delete arch/arm64/kernel/apei.c.
>      Add "#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
>
>   arch/arm64/Kconfig            |  1 +
>   arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h |  5 +++++
>   drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c      | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
>   3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> index 871f217..58c8992 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ config ARM64
>   	select ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED if ACPI
>   	select ACPI_GENERIC_GSI if ACPI
>   	select ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY if ACPI
> +	select HAVE_ACPI_APEI if ACPI
>   	select ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC64_DEC_IF_POSITIVE
>   	select ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE
>   	select ARCH_HAS_GCOV_PROFILE_ALL
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> index caafd63..31d3d9a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>
>   #include <asm/cputype.h>
>   #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
> +#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>
>   /* Macros for consistency checks of the GICC subtable of MADT */
>   #define ACPI_MADT_GICC_LENGTH	\
> @@ -94,6 +95,10 @@ static inline const char *acpi_get_enable_method(int cpu)
>
>   #ifdef	CONFIG_ACPI_APEI
>   pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr);

How bout adding a empty line here?

Except that,

Acked-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>

Thanks
Hanjun

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Fu Wei]

Hi Hanjun,

On 8 December 2015 at 19:26, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Fu Wei,
>
>
> On 12/08/2015 03:03 PM, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
>>
>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>>
>> This commit provides APEI arch-specific bits for aarch64
>>
>> Meanwhile, add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for
>> "acpi_disable_cmcff" which is used by IA-32 Architecture
>> Corrected Machine Check (CMC).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>> Tested-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> Changelog:
>> v4: Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc4).
>>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one into header file as a inline function
>>      Add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
>>
>> v3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/3/521
>>      Remove "acpi_disable_cmcff" from arm64 code,
>>      and wrap it in hest.c by "#if defined(__i386__) ||
>> defined(__x86_64__)"
>>
>> v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/2/432
>>      Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc3).
>>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c
>>
>> v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/8/14/199
>>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/include/asm/apci.h.
>>      Delete arch/arm64/kernel/apei.c.
>>      Add "#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
>>
>>   arch/arm64/Kconfig            |  1 +
>>   arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h |  5 +++++
>>   drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c      | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
>>   3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> index 871f217..58c8992 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ config ARM64
>>         select ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED if ACPI
>>         select ACPI_GENERIC_GSI if ACPI
>>         select ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY if ACPI
>> +       select HAVE_ACPI_APEI if ACPI
>>         select ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC64_DEC_IF_POSITIVE
>>         select ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE
>>         select ARCH_HAS_GCOV_PROFILE_ALL
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> index caafd63..31d3d9a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>
>>   #include <asm/cputype.h>
>>   #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
>> +#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>>
>>   /* Macros for consistency checks of the GICC subtable of MADT */
>>   #define ACPI_MADT_GICC_LENGTH \
>> @@ -94,6 +95,10 @@ static inline const char *acpi_get_enable_method(int
>> cpu)
>>
>>   #ifdef        CONFIG_ACPI_APEI
>>   pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr);
>
>
> How bout adding a empty line here?

np, done


diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
index 31d3d9a..da657a9 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
@@ -95,10 +95,10 @@ static inline const char *acpi_get_enable_method(int cpu)

 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI
 pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr);
+
 static inline void arch_apei_flush_tlb_one(unsigned long addr)
 {
        flush_tlb_kernel_range(addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE);
 }
-#endif
-
+#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI_APEI */
 #endif /*_ASM_ACPI_H*/


>
> Except that,
>
> Acked-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>

Great thanks for your review :-)

>
> Thanks
> Hanjun



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Lorenzo Pieralisi]

On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:03:03PM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>

[...]

> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
>  /*
>   * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to be set
>   * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
>   */
>  static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr, void *data)
>  {
> -	return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
> +	if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)

Why do not you define the flag above in this file (move it out of x86 -
that's what I was aiming at in my previous reply) and remove this ifdeffery
altogether (First firmware handling could apply to arm64 too according to
specs and ACPI on arm64 guidelines) ?

arch_apei_enable_cmcff() is a weak function that does nothing on arm64
and if we need to add an implementation we can do it later.

Thanks,
Lorenzo

> +		return !arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void)
> +{
> +	return apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_cmc, NULL);
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void) { return 0; }
> +#endif
> +
>  struct ghes_arr {
>  	struct platform_device **ghes_devs;
>  	unsigned int count;
> @@ -232,8 +244,9 @@ void __init acpi_hest_init(void)
>  		goto err;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
> -		apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_cmc, NULL);
> +	rc = hest_ia_init();
> +	if (rc)
> +		goto err;
>  
>  	if (!ghes_disable) {
>  		rc = apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_ghes_count, &ghes_count);
> -- 
> 2.5.0
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Hanjun Guo]

Hi Lorenzo,

On 12/08/2015 08:34 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:03:03PM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>
> [...]
>
>> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
>>   /*
>>    * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to be set
>>    * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
>>    */
>>   static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr, void *data)
>>   {
>> -	return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
>> +	if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
>
> Why do not you define the flag above in this file (move it out of x86 -
> that's what I was aiming at in my previous reply) and remove this ifdeffery
> altogether (First firmware handling could apply to arm64 too according to
> specs and ACPI on arm64 guidelines) ?

If I understand it correctly, CMC (Corrected Machine Check) is for IA32
only, see section 18.3.2.1 IA-32 Architecture Machine Check Exception
in ACPI 6.0. for ARM64, we can use other type of error source for
firmware first handling, such as Generic Hardware Error Source, did
I miss something?

Thanks
Hanjun

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Fu Wei]

Hi Lorenzo,



On 8 December 2015 at 20:52, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> On 12/08/2015 08:34 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:03:03PM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
>>>   /*
>>>    * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to
>>> be set
>>>    * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
>>>    */
>>>   static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr,
>>> void *data)
>>>   {
>>> -       return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
>>> +       if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
>>
>>
>> Why do not you define the flag above in this file (move it out of x86 -
>> that's what I was aiming at in my previous reply) and remove this
>> ifdeffery
>> altogether (First firmware handling could apply to arm64 too according to
>> specs and ACPI on arm64 guidelines) ?
>
>
> If I understand it correctly, CMC (Corrected Machine Check) is for IA32
> only, see section 18.3.2.1 IA-32 Architecture Machine Check Exception
> in ACPI 6.0. for ARM64, we can use other type of error source for
> firmware first handling, such as Generic Hardware Error Source, did
> I miss something?

yes, that is why I try to use "#if defined(__i386__) ||
defined(__x86_64__)" instead of moving acpi_disable_cmcff out of x86
code to here.

And I thinks we also can do "arch_apei_enable_cmcff" -->
"apei_enable_ia_cmcff" because that is IA32 only.

Please correct me if I misunderstand something.  Thanks :-)

Great thanks for your feedback :-)

>
> Thanks
> Hanjun



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Lorenzo Pieralisi]

On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 09:08:24PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
> 
> 
> 
> On 8 December 2015 at 20:52, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
> > Hi Lorenzo,
> >
> > On 12/08/2015 08:34 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:03:03PM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
> >>>
> >>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
> >>
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
> >>>   /*
> >>>    * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to
> >>> be set
> >>>    * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
> >>>    */
> >>>   static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr,
> >>> void *data)
> >>>   {
> >>> -       return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
> >>> +       if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
> >>
> >>
> >> Why do not you define the flag above in this file (move it out of x86 -
> >> that's what I was aiming at in my previous reply) and remove this
> >> ifdeffery
> >> altogether (First firmware handling could apply to arm64 too according to
> >> specs and ACPI on arm64 guidelines) ?
> >
> >
> > If I understand it correctly, CMC (Corrected Machine Check) is for IA32
> > only, see section 18.3.2.1 IA-32 Architecture Machine Check Exception
> > in ACPI 6.0. for ARM64, we can use other type of error source for
> > firmware first handling, such as Generic Hardware Error Source, did
> > I miss something?
> 
> yes, that is why I try to use "#if defined(__i386__) ||
> defined(__x86_64__)" instead of moving acpi_disable_cmcff out of x86
> code to here.
> 
> And I thinks we also can do "arch_apei_enable_cmcff" -->
> "apei_enable_ia_cmcff" because that is IA32 only.
> 
> Please correct me if I misunderstand something.  Thanks :-)

No you are right, I was confused by the arch_apei_enable_cmcff __weak
function declaration, I am not sure that makes much sense, as you say.

Side note: I wonder if there is a way to make the TLB flushing API common
across architectures therefore avoiding this arch_apei_flush_tlb* churn.

Thanks,
Lorenzo

> Great thanks for your feedback :-)
> 
> >
> > Thanks
> > Hanjun
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> 
> Fu Wei
> Software Engineer
> Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
> Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
> Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
> Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
> One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
> Shanghai,China 200021
> 

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Fu Wei]

Hi Lorenzo,

On 8 December 2015 at 22:07, Lorenzo Pieralisi
<lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 09:08:24PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
>> Hi Lorenzo,
>>
>>
>>
>> On 8 December 2015 at 20:52, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
>> > Hi Lorenzo,
>> >
>> > On 12/08/2015 08:34 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:03:03PM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> [...]
>> >>
>> >>> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
>> >>>   /*
>> >>>    * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to
>> >>> be set
>> >>>    * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
>> >>>    */
>> >>>   static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr,
>> >>> void *data)
>> >>>   {
>> >>> -       return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
>> >>> +       if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Why do not you define the flag above in this file (move it out of x86 -
>> >> that's what I was aiming at in my previous reply) and remove this
>> >> ifdeffery
>> >> altogether (First firmware handling could apply to arm64 too according to
>> >> specs and ACPI on arm64 guidelines) ?
>> >
>> >
>> > If I understand it correctly, CMC (Corrected Machine Check) is for IA32
>> > only, see section 18.3.2.1 IA-32 Architecture Machine Check Exception
>> > in ACPI 6.0. for ARM64, we can use other type of error source for
>> > firmware first handling, such as Generic Hardware Error Source, did
>> > I miss something?
>>
>> yes, that is why I try to use "#if defined(__i386__) ||
>> defined(__x86_64__)" instead of moving acpi_disable_cmcff out of x86
>> code to here.
>>
>> And I thinks we also can do "arch_apei_enable_cmcff" -->
>> "apei_enable_ia_cmcff" because that is IA32 only.
>>
>> Please correct me if I misunderstand something.  Thanks :-)
>
> No you are right, I was confused by the arch_apei_enable_cmcff __weak
> function declaration, I am not sure that makes much sense, as you say.
>

Thanks :-)


> Side note: I wonder if there is a way to make the TLB flushing API common
> across architectures therefore avoiding this arch_apei_flush_tlb* churn.

yes, make sense, I will think about this today , thanks for your suggestion.

>
> Thanks,
> Lorenzo
>
>> Great thanks for your feedback :-)
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Hanjun
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Fu Wei
>> Software Engineer
>> Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
>> Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
>> Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
>> Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
>> One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
>> Shanghai,China 200021
>>



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Fu Wei]

Hi Lorenzo,

On 9 December 2015 at 11:25, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> On 8 December 2015 at 22:07, Lorenzo Pieralisi
> <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 09:08:24PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
>>> Hi Lorenzo,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8 December 2015 at 20:52, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> > Hi Lorenzo,
>>> >
>>> > On 12/08/2015 08:34 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:03:03PM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> [...]
>>> >>
>>> >>> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
>>> >>>   /*
>>> >>>    * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to
>>> >>> be set
>>> >>>    * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
>>> >>>    */
>>> >>>   static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr,
>>> >>> void *data)
>>> >>>   {
>>> >>> -       return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
>>> >>> +       if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Why do not you define the flag above in this file (move it out of x86 -
>>> >> that's what I was aiming at in my previous reply) and remove this
>>> >> ifdeffery
>>> >> altogether (First firmware handling could apply to arm64 too according to
>>> >> specs and ACPI on arm64 guidelines) ?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > If I understand it correctly, CMC (Corrected Machine Check) is for IA32
>>> > only, see section 18.3.2.1 IA-32 Architecture Machine Check Exception
>>> > in ACPI 6.0. for ARM64, we can use other type of error source for
>>> > firmware first handling, such as Generic Hardware Error Source, did
>>> > I miss something?
>>>
>>> yes, that is why I try to use "#if defined(__i386__) ||
>>> defined(__x86_64__)" instead of moving acpi_disable_cmcff out of x86
>>> code to here.
>>>
>>> And I thinks we also can do "arch_apei_enable_cmcff" -->
>>> "apei_enable_ia_cmcff" because that is IA32 only.
>>>
>>> Please correct me if I misunderstand something.  Thanks :-)
>>
>> No you are right, I was confused by the arch_apei_enable_cmcff __weak
>> function declaration, I am not sure that makes much sense, as you say.
>>
>
> Thanks :-)
>
>
>> Side note: I wonder if there is a way to make the TLB flushing API common
>> across architectures therefore avoiding this arch_apei_flush_tlb* churn.
>
> yes, make sense, I will think about this today , thanks for your suggestion.

I do some investigation on this "tlb" problem(actually not just tlb,
but also "get_mem_attribute") today,
I think we need to
(1)have a common API in tlbflush.h (at least for flushing one page)
across architectures(at least in x86 and arm64)
(2)use this API in drivers/acpi/apei/gest.c instead of arch_apei_flush_tlb_one
(3)delete the old function from arm64 and x86

So maybe we can have the another patchset to solve this problem, make
this patch just enable APEI for arm64 first. :-)

>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lorenzo
>>
>>> Great thanks for your feedback :-)
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> > Hanjun
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Fu Wei
>>> Software Engineer
>>> Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
>>> Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
>>> Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
>>> Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
>>> One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
>>> Shanghai,China 200021
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Fu Wei
> Software Engineer
> Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
> Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
> Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
> Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
> One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
> Shanghai,China 200021



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Will Deacon]

[adding Boris, as he might know how this works]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 10:02:39AM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
> On 9 December 2015 at 11:25, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On 8 December 2015 at 22:07, Lorenzo Pieralisi
> > <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
> >> Side note: I wonder if there is a way to make the TLB flushing API common
> >> across architectures therefore avoiding this arch_apei_flush_tlb* churn.
> >
> > yes, make sense, I will think about this today , thanks for your suggestion.
> 
> I do some investigation on this "tlb" problem(actually not just tlb,
> but also "get_mem_attribute") today,
> I think we need to
> (1)have a common API in tlbflush.h (at least for flushing one page)
> across architectures(at least in x86 and arm64)

It's not about flushing one page, flush_tlb_kernel_range (which is called
by unmap_kernel_range) already takes care of that. The problem is that
the unmap is called from irq/nmi context, so the IPIs required for
broadcasting the TLB maintenance on x86 cannot be safely executed.

So, if you're going to introduce anything in the way of TLB API, then it
should be a generic form of the local_flush_tlb_* functions that we already
have on ARM, imo. That sounds like a lot of work for this one problem.

You could call flush_tlb_page with a fake vma/mm, but it's pretty ugly.

> (2)use this API in drivers/acpi/apei/gest.c instead of arch_apei_flush_tlb_one
> (3)delete the old function from arm64 and x86

Ideally, I think the ghes code would just use unmap_kernel_range unless
the architecture specifically says that doesn't work in irq context. In
that case, we don't need to implement the arch_apei_flush_tlb_one callback
on arm64.

One thing I don't fully grok about the code: since the page is mapped
using ioremap_page_range, doesn't that allow other CPUs to speculatively
fill their TLB with entries corresponding to the page mapped by the IRQ
handler on another core? If the core with the speculative entries then
takes an APEI exception, what guarantees do we have that it's looking at
the right page? I think, for x86, we need a local invalidation on map,
too.

Will

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Borislav Petkov]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:01:35AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> [adding Boris, as he might know how this works]

Gee, thanks Will, now you're making me look at this too :-)

> It's not about flushing one page, flush_tlb_kernel_range (which is called
> by unmap_kernel_range) already takes care of that. The problem is that
> the unmap is called from irq/nmi context, so the IPIs required for
> broadcasting the TLB maintenance on x86 cannot be safely executed.

Hmm, if you're talking about ghes_iounmap_nmi() and ghes_iounmap_irq()
which are the two callers of unmap_kernel_range_noflush(), that last one
is calling vunmap_page_range() which is fiddling with the page table.
And I don't see TLB flushing IPIs there.

If you mean arch_apei_flush_tlb_one(), that's INVLPG on x86 so also no
IPI.

What am I missing?

> Ideally, I think the ghes code would just use unmap_kernel_range unless
> the architecture specifically says that doesn't work in irq context. In
> that case, we don't need to implement the arch_apei_flush_tlb_one callback
> on arm64.

Well, what bothers me with using
unmap_kernel_range()/vunmap_page_range() is that if a GHES IRQ/NMI
happens while something is executing those, the NMI will interrupt
whatever's happening and it will possibly corrupt the pagetable, IMHO.

Michal, Vlasta, can you please take a look?

More specifically, those ghes_iounmap_nmi/ghes_iounmap_irq calls to
unmap_kernel_range_noflush() happening in NMI/IRQ context.

> One thing I don't fully grok about the code: since the page is mapped
> using ioremap_page_range, doesn't that allow other CPUs to speculatively
> fill their TLB with entries corresponding to the page mapped by the IRQ
> handler on another core? If the core with the speculative entries then
> takes an APEI exception, what guarantees do we have that it's looking at
> the right page? I think, for x86, we need a local invalidation on map,
> too.

You're looking at ghes_copy_tofrom_phys(), right? That's grabbing
spinlocks in IRQ/NMI context and doing the iounmap a bit later, below
on the same core. I mean, I don't see us landing on another core in
between, we're non-preemptible...

Or do you mean something else?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)
-- 

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Will Deacon]

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 12:20:04PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:01:35AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > [adding Boris, as he might know how this works]
> 
> Gee, thanks Will, now you're making me look at this too :-)

Hey, I was having way too much fun by myself, so figured you'd like to
be involved as well!

> > It's not about flushing one page, flush_tlb_kernel_range (which is called
> > by unmap_kernel_range) already takes care of that. The problem is that
> > the unmap is called from irq/nmi context, so the IPIs required for
> > broadcasting the TLB maintenance on x86 cannot be safely executed.
> 
> Hmm, if you're talking about ghes_iounmap_nmi() and ghes_iounmap_irq()
> which are the two callers of unmap_kernel_range_noflush(), that last one
> is calling vunmap_page_range() which is fiddling with the page table.
> And I don't see TLB flushing IPIs there.
> 
> If you mean arch_apei_flush_tlb_one(), that's INVLPG on x86 so also no
> IPI.
> 
> What am I missing?

We're in violent agreement. I'm just saying that's *why*
arch_apei_flush_tlb_one exists, as opposed to calling unmap_kernel_range
in the driver (which will attempt IPIs). On arm64, unmap_kernel_range
will actually work correctly, since we don't need IPIs to broadcast TLB
maintenance.

The (incorrect) premise earlier in the thread was that
arch_apei_flush_tlb_one exists because there's no portable API for
flushing a single page, but that's simply not true.

> > Ideally, I think the ghes code would just use unmap_kernel_range unless
> > the architecture specifically says that doesn't work in irq context. In
> > that case, we don't need to implement the arch_apei_flush_tlb_one callback
> > on arm64.
> 
> Well, what bothers me with using
> unmap_kernel_range()/vunmap_page_range() is that if a GHES IRQ/NMI
> happens while something is executing those, the NMI will interrupt
> whatever's happening and it will possibly corrupt the pagetable, IMHO.
> 
> Michal, Vlasta, can you please take a look?
> 
> More specifically, those ghes_iounmap_nmi/ghes_iounmap_irq calls to
> unmap_kernel_range_noflush() happening in NMI/IRQ context.

Yikes, I'd not even thought about that. Perhaps its all serialised
somehow, but I have no idea.

> > One thing I don't fully grok about the code: since the page is mapped
> > using ioremap_page_range, doesn't that allow other CPUs to speculatively
> > fill their TLB with entries corresponding to the page mapped by the IRQ
> > handler on another core? If the core with the speculative entries then
> > takes an APEI exception, what guarantees do we have that it's looking at
> > the right page? I think, for x86, we need a local invalidation on map,
> > too.
> 
> You're looking at ghes_copy_tofrom_phys(), right? That's grabbing
> spinlocks in IRQ/NMI context and doing the iounmap a bit later, below
> on the same core. I mean, I don't see us landing on another core in
> between, we're non-preemptible...
> 
> Or do you mean something else?

Right, imagine the following sequence of events:

 1. CPU x takes a GHES IRQ
 2. CPU x then maps the buffer a page at a time in ghes_copy_tofrom_phys.
    After each unmap, it performs a local TLBI. Let's say that it has
    the final page of the buffer mapped when...
 3. ... CPU y is meanwhile happily executing some other kernel code.
 4. CPU y's page table walker speculatively fills the TLB with a translation
    for the last buffer page that CPU x has mapped (because its just been
    mapped with ioremap_page_range and is in the kernel page table).
 5. CPU x unmaps the last page, performs a *local* TLBI, handles the
    event and returns from the exception
 6. CPU y takes a GHES IRQ
 7. CPU y then maps the first buffer page at the same virtual address
    that CPU x used to map the last buffer page
 8. CPU y accesses the page, hits the stale TLB entry and gets junk

which I think means you need to perform local TLB invalidation on map
as well as unmap.

Is there some reason this can't happen on x86? It sounds plausible on
arm64 if we were to use local invalidation.

Will

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Borislav Petkov]

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 11:46:59AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> We're in violent agreement. I'm just saying that's *why*
> arch_apei_flush_tlb_one exists, as opposed to calling unmap_kernel_range
> in the driver (which will attempt IPIs). On arm64, unmap_kernel_range
> will actually work correctly, since we don't need IPIs to broadcast TLB
> maintenance.
> 
> The (incorrect) premise earlier in the thread was that
> arch_apei_flush_tlb_one exists because there's no portable API for
> flushing a single page, but that's simply not true.

Right.

> Yikes, I'd not even thought about that. Perhaps its all serialised
> somehow, but I have no idea.

Yeah, didn't see any serialization there...

> Right, imagine the following sequence of events:
> 
>  1. CPU x takes a GHES IRQ
>  2. CPU x then maps the buffer a page at a time in ghes_copy_tofrom_phys.
>     After each unmap, it performs a local TLBI. Let's say that it has
>     the final page of the buffer mapped when...
>  3. ... CPU y is meanwhile happily executing some other kernel code.
>  4. CPU y's page table walker speculatively fills the TLB with a translation
>     for the last buffer page that CPU x has mapped (because its just been
>     mapped with ioremap_page_range and is in the kernel page table).
>  5. CPU x unmaps the last page, performs a *local* TLBI, handles the
>     event and returns from the exception
>  6. CPU y takes a GHES IRQ
>  7. CPU y then maps the first buffer page at the same virtual address
>     that CPU x used to map the last buffer page
>  8. CPU y accesses the page, hits the stale TLB entry and gets junk
> 
> which I think means you need to perform local TLB invalidation on map
> as well as unmap.
> 
> Is there some reason this can't happen on x86? It sounds plausible on
> arm64 if we were to use local invalidation.

Ha, thanks for the detailed example, I see it now!

And I too don't see a reason why that can't happen. And the GHES
IRQ is a GSI, which has "global" in the name but I don't think that
means it interrupts the whole system like an NMI does. Especially
if it is registered/handled like a normal irq: acpi_gsi_to_irq() ..
request_irq()...

Adding Tony.

If anything, we probably should be doing something with irq_work at the
end of ghes_copy_tofrom_phys() so that the invalidation of any possible
speculative mappings happens before we return from the GHES IRQ.

Hmm, currently I'm not even clear whether this'll work: we would
theoretically need to send IPIs from IRQ context, at the end of the GHES
IRQ...

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)
-- 

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Suzuki K. Poulose]

On 08/12/15 07:03, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>
> This commit provides APEI arch-specific bits for aarch64
>
> Meanwhile, add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for
> "acpi_disable_cmcff" which is used by IA-32 Architecture
> Corrected Machine Check (CMC).
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
> Tested-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> ---
> Changelog:
> v4: Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc4).
>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one into header file as a inline function
>      Add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
>
> v3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/3/521
>      Remove "acpi_disable_cmcff" from arm64 code,
>      and wrap it in hest.c by "#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)"
>
> v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/2/432
>      Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc3).
>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c
>
> v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/8/14/199
>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/include/asm/apci.h.
>      Delete arch/arm64/kernel/apei.c.
>      Add "#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
>
>   arch/arm64/Kconfig            |  1 +
>   arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h |  5 +++++
>   drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c      | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
>   3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> index 871f217..58c8992 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ config ARM64
>   	select ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED if ACPI
>   	select ACPI_GENERIC_GSI if ACPI
>   	select ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY if ACPI
> +	select HAVE_ACPI_APEI if ACPI
>   	select ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC64_DEC_IF_POSITIVE
>   	select ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE
>   	select ARCH_HAS_GCOV_PROFILE_ALL
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> index caafd63..31d3d9a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>
>   #include <asm/cputype.h>
>   #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
> +#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>
>   /* Macros for consistency checks of the GICC subtable of MADT */
>   #define ACPI_MADT_GICC_LENGTH	\
> @@ -94,6 +95,10 @@ static inline const char *acpi_get_enable_method(int cpu)
>
>   #ifdef	CONFIG_ACPI_APEI
>   pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr);
> +static inline void arch_apei_flush_tlb_one(unsigned long addr)
> +{
> +	flush_tlb_kernel_range(addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE);
> +}
>   #endif
>
>   #endif /*_ASM_ACPI_H*/
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
> index 20b3fcf..715c58b 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
> @@ -117,15 +117,27 @@ int apei_hest_parse(apei_hest_func_t func, void *data)
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(apei_hest_parse);
>
> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)

Would it be better if define a symbol like :

HAVE_ARCH_APEI_CMCFF for x86 and wrap it around that ?

>   /*
>    * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to be set
>    * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
>    */
>   static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr, void *data)
>   {
> -	return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
> +	if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
> +		return !arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
> +
> +	return 0;
>   }
>
> +static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void)
> +{
> +	return apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_cmc, NULL);
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void) { return 0; }
> +#endif

Cheers
Suzuki

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Fu Wei]

Hi Suzuki,

On 8 December 2015 at 23:53, Suzuki K. Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> wrote:
> On 08/12/15 07:03, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
>>
>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>>
>> This commit provides APEI arch-specific bits for aarch64
>>
>> Meanwhile, add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for
>> "acpi_disable_cmcff" which is used by IA-32 Architecture
>> Corrected Machine Check (CMC).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
>> Tested-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> Changelog:
>> v4: Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc4).
>>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one into header file as a inline function
>>      Add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
>>
>> v3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/3/521
>>      Remove "acpi_disable_cmcff" from arm64 code,
>>      and wrap it in hest.c by "#if defined(__i386__) ||
>> defined(__x86_64__)"
>>
>> v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/2/432
>>      Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc3).
>>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c
>>
>> v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/8/14/199
>>      Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/include/asm/apci.h.
>>      Delete arch/arm64/kernel/apei.c.
>>      Add "#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
>>
>>   arch/arm64/Kconfig            |  1 +
>>   arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h |  5 +++++
>>   drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c      | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
>>   3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> index 871f217..58c8992 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ config ARM64
>>         select ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED if ACPI
>>         select ACPI_GENERIC_GSI if ACPI
>>         select ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY if ACPI
>> +       select HAVE_ACPI_APEI if ACPI
>>         select ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC64_DEC_IF_POSITIVE
>>         select ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE
>>         select ARCH_HAS_GCOV_PROFILE_ALL
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> index caafd63..31d3d9a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>
>>   #include <asm/cputype.h>
>>   #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
>> +#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>>
>>   /* Macros for consistency checks of the GICC subtable of MADT */
>>   #define ACPI_MADT_GICC_LENGTH \
>> @@ -94,6 +95,10 @@ static inline const char *acpi_get_enable_method(int
>> cpu)
>>
>>   #ifdef        CONFIG_ACPI_APEI
>>   pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr);
>> +static inline void arch_apei_flush_tlb_one(unsigned long addr)
>> +{
>> +       flush_tlb_kernel_range(addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE);
>> +}
>>   #endif
>>
>>   #endif /*_ASM_ACPI_H*/
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
>> index 20b3fcf..715c58b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
>> @@ -117,15 +117,27 @@ int apei_hest_parse(apei_hest_func_t func, void
>> *data)
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(apei_hest_parse);
>>
>> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
>
>
> Would it be better if define a symbol like :
>
> HAVE_ARCH_APEI_CMCFF for x86 and wrap it around that ?

I think that is a brilliant idea!
By this way , we can avoid to use  "defined(__i386__) ||
defined(__x86_64__)" which is not recommended in Linux kernel.

Thanks for your suggestion.

I thinks maybe we can name this as HAVE_ACPI_APEI_HEST_IA32 for or x86
and wrap all hest_ia_init relevant code.

>
>>   /*
>>    * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to
>> be set
>>    * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
>>    */
>>   static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr, void
>> *data)
>>   {
>> -       return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
>> +       if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
>> +               return !arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
>> +
>> +       return 0;
>>   }
>>
>> +static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void)
>> +{
>> +       return apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_cmc, NULL);
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void) { return 0; }
>> +#endif
>
>
> Cheers
> Suzuki
>



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021

[PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64.

[Borislav Petkov]

On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:03:03PM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
> 
> This commit provides APEI arch-specific bits for aarch64
> 
> Meanwhile, add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for
> "acpi_disable_cmcff" which is used by IA-32 Architecture
> Corrected Machine Check (CMC).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
> Tested-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> ---
> Changelog:
> v4: Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc4).
>     Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one into header file as a inline function
>     Add a new subfunction "hest_ia_init" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
> 
> v3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/3/521
>     Remove "acpi_disable_cmcff" from arm64 code,
>     and wrap it in hest.c by "#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)"
> 
> v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/2/432
>     Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc3).
>     Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c
> 
> v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/8/14/199
>     Move arch_apei_flush_tlb_one() to arch/arm64/include/asm/apci.h.
>     Delete arch/arm64/kernel/apei.c.
>     Add "#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI" for "acpi_disable_cmcff".
> 
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig            |  1 +
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h |  5 +++++
>  drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c      | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
>  3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> index 871f217..58c8992 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ config ARM64
>  	select ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED if ACPI
>  	select ACPI_GENERIC_GSI if ACPI
>  	select ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY if ACPI
> +	select HAVE_ACPI_APEI if ACPI
>  	select ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC64_DEC_IF_POSITIVE
>  	select ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE
>  	select ARCH_HAS_GCOV_PROFILE_ALL
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> index caafd63..31d3d9a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>  
>  #include <asm/cputype.h>
>  #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
> +#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>  
>  /* Macros for consistency checks of the GICC subtable of MADT */
>  #define ACPI_MADT_GICC_LENGTH	\
> @@ -94,6 +95,10 @@ static inline const char *acpi_get_enable_method(int cpu)
>  
>  #ifdef	CONFIG_ACPI_APEI
>  pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr);
> +static inline void arch_apei_flush_tlb_one(unsigned long addr)
> +{
> +	flush_tlb_kernel_range(addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE);
> +}
>  #endif
>  
>  #endif /*_ASM_ACPI_H*/
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
> index 20b3fcf..715c58b 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c
> @@ -117,15 +117,27 @@ int apei_hest_parse(apei_hest_func_t func, void *data)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(apei_hest_parse);
>  
> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
>  /*
>   * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to be set
>   * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode.
>   */
>  static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr, void *data)
>  {
> -	return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
> +	if (!acpi_disable_cmcff)
> +		return !arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data);
> +
> +	return 0;

So the proper way to do this is to leave the code still do this check
(in arch/x86/kernel/acpi/apei.c:arch_apei_enable_cmcff()):

	if (hest_hdr->type != ACPI_HEST_TYPE_IA32_CORRECTED_CHECK)
		return 0;

which should JustWork(tm) on ARM too because if ARM doesn't support IA32
CMCI, then that header type should be different and the function will
return 0.

For that to work, though, the check should be moved to a generic place,
like drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c:hest_parse_cmc() for example.

No crazy ifdeffery and no redundant Kconfig symbols please.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.