From: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>
To: <shiju.jose@huawei.com>
Cc: <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>, <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
<dave@stgolabs.net>, <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>,
<dave.jiang@intel.com>, <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
<ira.weiny@intel.com>, <nifan.cxl@gmail.com>,
<linuxarm@huawei.com>, <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>,
<prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cxl/events: Update Common Event Record to CXL spec rev 3.2
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 12:11:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aCTq7IX49iLBiwJL@aschofie-mobl2.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250514151913.752-1-shiju.jose@huawei.com>
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 04:19:13PM +0100, shiju.jose@huawei.com wrote:
> From: Shiju Jose <shiju.jose@huawei.com>
>
> CXL spec 3.2 section 8.2.10.2.1 Table 8-55, Common Event Record format
> has updated with LD-ID and ID of the device head fields.
This comment is less important now that I've opened the spec and looked
them up. In addition to a spec reference, please take a moment in this
commit message to describe the new fields and what they offer.
nit below -
>
> Add updates for the above spec changes in the CXL events record and CXL
> common trace event implementation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shiju Jose <shiju.jose@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/cxl/core/trace.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
> include/cxl/event.h | 4 +++-
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/trace.h b/drivers/cxl/core/trace.h
> index 25ebfbc1616c..ce482e57a477 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/trace.h
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/trace.h
> @@ -214,12 +214,16 @@ TRACE_EVENT(cxl_overflow,
> #define CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_PERF_DEGRADED BIT(4)
> #define CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_HW_REPLACE BIT(5)
> #define CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_MAINT_OP_SUB_CLASS_VALID BIT(6)
> +#define CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_LD_ID_VALID BIT(7)
> +#define CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_HEAD_ID_VALID BIT(8)
> #define show_hdr_flags(flags) __print_flags(flags, " | ", \
> { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_PERMANENT, "PERMANENT_CONDITION" }, \
> { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_MAINT_NEEDED, "MAINTENANCE_NEEDED" }, \
> { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_PERF_DEGRADED, "PERFORMANCE_DEGRADED" }, \
> - { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_HW_REPLACE, "HARDWARE_REPLACEMENT_NEEDED" }, \
> - { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_MAINT_OP_SUB_CLASS_VALID, "MAINT_OP_SUB_CLASS_VALID" } \
> + { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_HW_REPLACE, "HARDWARE_REPLACEMENT_NEEDED" }, \
> + { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_MAINT_OP_SUB_CLASS_VALID, "MAINT_OP_SUB_CLASS_VALID" }, \
> + { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_LD_ID_VALID, "LD_ID_VALID" }, \
> + { CXL_EVENT_RECORD_FLAG_HEAD_ID_VALID, "HEAD_ID_VALID" } \
> )
Is there some spurious changes above? I don't see why HW_REPLACE line
needed an edit.
>
> /*
> @@ -247,7 +251,9 @@ TRACE_EVENT(cxl_overflow,
> __field(u64, hdr_timestamp) \
> __field(u8, hdr_length) \
> __field(u8, hdr_maint_op_class) \
> - __field(u8, hdr_maint_op_sub_class)
> + __field(u8, hdr_maint_op_sub_class) \
> + __field(u16, hdr_ld_id) \
> + __field(u8, hdr_head_id)
>
> #define CXL_EVT_TP_fast_assign(cxlmd, l, hdr) \
> __assign_str(memdev); \
> @@ -260,18 +266,22 @@ TRACE_EVENT(cxl_overflow,
> __entry->hdr_related_handle = le16_to_cpu((hdr).related_handle); \
> __entry->hdr_timestamp = le64_to_cpu((hdr).timestamp); \
> __entry->hdr_maint_op_class = (hdr).maint_op_class; \
> - __entry->hdr_maint_op_sub_class = (hdr).maint_op_sub_class
> + __entry->hdr_maint_op_sub_class = (hdr).maint_op_sub_class; \
> + __entry->hdr_ld_id = le16_to_cpu((hdr).ld_id); \
> + __entry->hdr_head_id = (hdr).head_id
clean
>
> #define CXL_EVT_TP_printk(fmt, ...) \
> TP_printk("memdev=%s host=%s serial=%lld log=%s : time=%llu uuid=%pUb " \
> "len=%d flags='%s' handle=%x related_handle=%x " \
> - "maint_op_class=%u maint_op_sub_class=%u : " fmt, \
> + "maint_op_class=%u maint_op_sub_class=%u ld_id=%x " \
> + "head_id=%x : " fmt, \
clean
> __get_str(memdev), __get_str(host), __entry->serial, \
> cxl_event_log_type_str(__entry->log), \
> __entry->hdr_timestamp, &__entry->hdr_uuid, __entry->hdr_length,\
> show_hdr_flags(__entry->hdr_flags), __entry->hdr_handle, \
> __entry->hdr_related_handle, __entry->hdr_maint_op_class, \
> - __entry->hdr_maint_op_sub_class, \
> + __entry->hdr_maint_op_sub_class, __entry->hdr_ld_id, \
> + __entry->hdr_head_id, \
> ##__VA_ARGS__)
OK (only OK because I may have just started a new line to avoid the (-))
>
> TRACE_EVENT(cxl_generic_event,
> diff --git a/include/cxl/event.h b/include/cxl/event.h
> index f9ae1796da85..f4cb8568566b 100644
> --- a/include/cxl/event.h
> +++ b/include/cxl/event.h
> @@ -19,7 +19,9 @@ struct cxl_event_record_hdr {
> __le64 timestamp;
> u8 maint_op_class;
> u8 maint_op_sub_class;
> - u8 reserved[14];
> + __le16 ld_id;
> + u8 head_id;
> + u8 reserved[11];
> } __packed;
clean
>
> struct cxl_event_media_hdr {
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-14 19:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-14 15:19 [PATCH 1/1] cxl/events: Update Common Event Record to CXL spec rev 3.2 shiju.jose
2025-05-14 15:24 ` Dave Jiang
2025-05-14 19:11 ` Alison Schofield [this message]
2025-05-15 9:26 ` Shiju Jose
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=aCTq7IX49iLBiwJL@aschofie-mobl2.lan \
--to=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=nifan.cxl@gmail.com \
--cc=prime.zeng@hisilicon.com \
--cc=shiju.jose@huawei.com \
--cc=tanxiaofei@huawei.com \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.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