From: Matthew W Carlis <mattc@purestorage.com>
To: helgaas@kernel.org
Cc: Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com, adam.c.preble@intel.com,
agovindjee@purestorage.com, alison.schofield@intel.com,
ashishk@purestorage.com, bamstadt@purestorage.com,
bhelgaas@google.com, bp@alien8.de, chao.p.peng@intel.com,
dan.j.williams@intel.com, dave.jiang@intel.com,
dave@stgolabs.net, erwin.tsaur@intel.com,
feiting.wanyan@intel.com, ira.weiny@intel.com,
james.morse@arm.com, jrangi@purestorage.com, lenb@kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org,
linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
lukas@wunner.de, mahesh@linux.ibm.com, mattc@purestorage.com,
msaggi@purestorage.com, oohall@gmail.com,
qingshun.wang@linux.intel.com, rafael@kernel.org,
rhan@purestorage.com, rrichter@amd.com,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@intel.com, sconnor@purestorage.com,
tony.luck@intel.com, vishal.l.verma@intel.com,
yudong.wang@intel.com, zhenzhong.duan@intel.com
Subject: [PATCH v5 0/2] PCI/AER: Handle Advisory Non-Fatal error
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 19:00:16 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250828010016.5824-1-mattc@purestorage.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250822165112.GA688464@bhelgaas>
On Fri, 22 Aug 2025 11:51:12 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote
> Matthew, if you are able to test and/or provide a Reviewed-by, that would
> be the best thing you can do to move this forward ...
I spent some time looking at the patch thinking about it a little
more carefully. The only thing I don't really like in this revision
of the patch is the logging for "may cause Advisory". Example below
from "[PATCH v5 2/2] PCI/AER: Print UNCOR_STATUS bits that might be ANFE".
AER: Correctable error message received from 0000:b7:02.0
PCIe Bus Error: severity=Correctable, type=Transaction Layer, (Receiver ID)
device [8086:0db0] error status/mask=00002000/00000000
[13] NonFatalErr
Uncorrectable errors that may cause Advisory Non-Fatal:
[12] TLP
I don't think we really need to log the UE caused by ANF any differently
than any other UE & in fact I would prefer not to. In my mind we should log all
the UE status bits via the same format as before. Taking from example above,
in my mind it would be nice if the logging looked like this.
AER: Correctable error message received from 0000:b7:02.0
PCIe Bus Error: severity=Correctable, type=Transaction Layer, (Receiver ID)
device [8086:0db0] error status/mask=00002000/00000000
[13] NonFatalErr
PCIe Bus Error: severity=Uncorrectable (Non-Fatal), type=Transaction Layer
[12] TLP
If there was only one error (that triggered ANF handling) then we would
know that the Non-Fatal UE was what triggered the NonFatalErr. If some other
Non-Fatal errors are happening at the same time then it doesn't really matter
which was sent via ERR_COR vs ERR_NONFATAL since we would also know from Root
Error Status that we had received at least one of each message type. The
objective in my mind being to free up header-logs & log status details without
making error the recovery worse.
Does this sound reasonable or unreasonable? I can update the patch-set &
re-submit if 'reasonable'.
Cheers!
-Matt
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-28 1:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-20 2:58 [PATCH v5 0/2] PCI/AER: Handle Advisory Non-Fatal error Zhenzhong Duan
2024-06-20 2:58 ` [PATCH v5 1/2] PCI/AER: Clear UNCOR_STATUS bits that might be ANFE Zhenzhong Duan
2025-08-22 17:20 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-06-20 2:58 ` [PATCH v5 2/2] PCI/AER: Print " Zhenzhong Duan
2025-08-22 17:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-08-29 21:18 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-12 9:56 ` [PATCH v5 0/2] PCI/AER: Handle Advisory Non-Fatal error Duan, Zhenzhong
2025-08-21 16:58 ` Matthew W Carlis
2025-08-22 1:45 ` Duan, Zhenzhong
2025-08-22 16:51 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-08-22 18:15 ` Matthew W Carlis
2025-08-27 9:42 ` Duan, Zhenzhong
2025-08-28 1:00 ` Matthew W Carlis [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=20250828010016.5824-1-mattc@purestorage.com \
--to=mattc@purestorage.com \
--cc=Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com \
--cc=adam.c.preble@intel.com \
--cc=agovindjee@purestorage.com \
--cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=ashishk@purestorage.com \
--cc=bamstadt@purestorage.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=chao.p.peng@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=erwin.tsaur@intel.com \
--cc=feiting.wanyan@intel.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jrangi@purestorage.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=msaggi@purestorage.com \
--cc=oohall@gmail.com \
--cc=qingshun.wang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rhan@purestorage.com \
--cc=rrichter@amd.com \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@intel.com \
--cc=sconnor@purestorage.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
--cc=yudong.wang@intel.com \
--cc=zhenzhong.duan@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