From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from esa4.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com (esa4.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com [68.232.139.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFBD06EB51; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 10:06:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=68.232.139.117 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714039576; cv=none; b=mQy+KOq3/aUc8kgJ49rDL72GUZG+aqD5x2CVZzIJPus+2xDj6+tj3kwJdfgjfze/2IOBvU6Sukv77HZjyJ7AF5Vkk8uj/xoq16euS5vfaBN64Czcqe/X7j9Wd11AjAXD8h8SyUypgS3Dz56kx4v8lftNIZqw1J8zrysuQTDy+s8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714039576; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9ui7yF4xCi0s7W9PYYbpmr3fDfYDVJD2/IAdjVVo60E=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=TDiIU06B5ZHVA849k5nuPezkMNph8B0+PlelGAuttymAMVy4ScovEQ5n+dd+9LvzSUR2paTfCnoF7Zvq4jdJeeVSB6g+pUh65pRmedDICGOiWGwSp5ewIrXwYSrawA4Mvzuj1KYvgbsdbpEuwE7adDJIO40DQqX/Om9jJw1HvqY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=fujitsu.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fujitsu.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fujitsu.com header.i=@fujitsu.com header.b=hYMTxVTy; arc=none smtp.client-ip=68.232.139.117 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=fujitsu.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fujitsu.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fujitsu.com header.i=@fujitsu.com header.b="hYMTxVTy" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=fujitsu.com; i=@fujitsu.com; q=dns/txt; s=fj2; t=1714039573; x=1745575573; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9ui7yF4xCi0s7W9PYYbpmr3fDfYDVJD2/IAdjVVo60E=; b=hYMTxVTyYfqL7Z84/jo8Efk5PD9jxcE/HB5HiHCc89Wsp8npbvcUl1V7 xvo/A33N5o29+924SztQhcVB2uZL1zszxI+0WthwV/4IsZ+yJsCTFEwy5 XnaGb2E19lZKw+WRLmJ6ko2IaVo6CJbAvjw96ShCSfIDB19DlOPOHKPTZ HHPkRbNTIWSR6rQkdCAbGpiSLVLEpQEWzKVeqxza405bJPmEKnRemnWta JdP72WjKCWXhEkQHXiETktb7nxYbCNk0SmDnMRLtNDyGyMls+DRHLoC3V M9eNEF9YjxoHa8JTDPyc3oXCiYFkjSpyA57g2LUpmZKI1c0Hwvr5BTeE3 w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11054"; a="157008414" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,229,1708354800"; d="scan'208";a="157008414" Received: from unknown (HELO oym-r4.gw.nic.fujitsu.com) ([210.162.30.92]) by esa4.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Apr 2024 19:06:03 +0900 Received: from oym-m4.gw.nic.fujitsu.com (oym-nat-oym-m4.gw.nic.fujitsu.com [192.168.87.61]) by oym-r4.gw.nic.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F704D9DC3; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 19:06:01 +0900 (JST) Received: from kws-ab3.gw.nic.fujitsu.com (kws-ab3.gw.nic.fujitsu.com [192.51.206.21]) by oym-m4.gw.nic.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA709D4BE3; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 19:06:00 +0900 (JST) Received: from edo.cn.fujitsu.com (edo.cn.fujitsu.com [10.167.33.5]) by kws-ab3.gw.nic.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57CE0202D20DF; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 19:06:00 +0900 (JST) Received: from [192.168.50.5] (unknown [10.167.226.114]) by edo.cn.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AF301A000B; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 18:05:58 +0800 (CST) Message-ID: <5563b68c-48ab-48e3-bbc9-b93236ea0543@fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 18:05:58 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] cxl/core: correct length of DPA field masks To: Ira Weiny , Alison Schofield Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, dave@stgolabs.net, stable@vger.kernel.org References: <20240417075053.3273543-1-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> <20240417075053.3273543-2-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> <66282269c8d4e_d2ce22941e@iweiny-mobl.notmuch> From: Shiyang Ruan In-Reply-To: <66282269c8d4e_d2ce22941e@iweiny-mobl.notmuch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-9.1.0.1417-9.0.0.1002-28342.006 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes X-TMASE-Version: IMSS-9.1.0.1417-9.0.1002-28342.006 X-TMASE-Result: 10--8.769000-10.000000 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: ehvrJQ9m4PCPvrMjLFD6eHchRkqzj/bEC/ExpXrHizxBqLOmHiM3w9vx x0ntQKyZIvrftAIhWmLy9zcRSkKatdgW4k6aveo4JmbrB1j4Xwqu2GmdldmiUFAoBBK61BhcDNg h8//LFqcY75YLBQacDDXZ4YiSvO26P0DBdQeKlX30hv/rD7WVZAGo1vhC/pWj1tmGB7JU9CMQGU caieHP20ky3+YDnnncWtxX1bZT1YKPaFHMfVTC4IMbH85DUZXyudR/NJw2JHcNYpvo9xW+mI6HM 5rqDwqtdBt/JsWxNYMojJSc3dcGBinRbTgBFGIc+/ubgugAYE5DfpC/4XnsQAPA0m6VHcLNwMzJ Pwl8jS0FTjdoGJlwifD71DijxXcjgokLZRKLKVGdC4HNoe3rP7Iyum16+pyZ1elfyC1yu6+FK45 C57CBPA== X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0 在 2024/4/24 5:04, Ira Weiny 写道: > Alison Schofield wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 03:50:52PM +0800, Shiyang Ruan wrote: > > [snip] > >>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/trace.h b/drivers/cxl/core/trace.h >>> index e5f13260fc52..cdfce932d5b1 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/trace.h >>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/trace.h >>> @@ -253,7 +253,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(cxl_generic_event, >>> * DRAM Event Record >>> * CXL rev 3.0 section 8.2.9.2.1.2; Table 8-44 >>> */ >>> -#define CXL_DPA_FLAGS_MASK 0x3F >>> +#define CXL_DPA_FLAGS_MASK 0x3FULL >>> #define CXL_DPA_MASK (~CXL_DPA_FLAGS_MASK) >>> >>> #define CXL_DPA_VOLATILE BIT(0) >> >> This works but I'm thinking this is the time to convene on one >> CXL_EVENT_DPA_MASK for both all CXL events, rather than having >> cxl_poison event be different. >> >> I prefer how poison defines it: >> >> cxlmem.h:#define CXL_POISON_START_MASK GENMASK_ULL(63, 6) >> >> Can we rename that CXL_EVENT_DPA_MASK and use for all events? cxlmem.h:CXL_POISON_START_MASK is defined for MBOX commands (poison record, the lower 3 bits indicate "Error Source"), but CXL_DPA_MASK here is for events. They have different meaning though their values are same. So, I don't think we should consolidate them. > > Ah! Great catch. I dont' know why I only masked off the 2 used bits. Per spec, the lowest 2 bits of CXL event's DPA are defined for "Volatile or not" and "not repairable". So there is no mistake here. > That was short sighted of me. > > Yes we should consolidate these. > Ira -- Thanks, Ruan.