Re: [PATCH v7] x86/mce: retrieve poison range from hardware

[Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>]

Jane Chu wrote:
> On 8/3/2022 1:53 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> With Commit 7917f9cdb503 ("acpi/nfit: rely on mce->misc to determine
> > 
> > s/Commit/commit
> 
> Maintainers,
> Would you prefer a v8, or take care the comment upon accepting the patch?
> 
> > 
> >> poison granularity") that changed nfit_handle_mce() callback to report
> >> badrange according to 1ULL << MCI_MISC_ADDR_LSB(mce->misc), it's been
> >> discovered that the mce->misc LSB field is 0x1000 bytes, hence injecting
> >> 2 back-to-back poisons and the driver ends up logging 8 badblocks,
> >> because 0x1000 bytes is 8 512-byte.
> >>
> >> Dan Williams noticed that apei_mce_report_mem_error() hardcode
> >> the LSB field to PAGE_SHIFT instead of consulting the input
> >> struct cper_sec_mem_err record.  So change to rely on hardware whenever
> >> support is available.
> >>
> >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/7ed50fd8-521e-cade-77b1-738b8bfb8502@oracle.com
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com>
> >> ---
> >>   arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c
> >> index 717192915f28..8ed341714686 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c
> >> @@ -29,15 +29,26 @@
> >>   void apei_mce_report_mem_error(int severity, struct cper_sec_mem_err *mem_err)
> >>   {
> >>   	struct mce m;
> >> +	int lsb;
> >>   
> >>   	if (!(mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_PA))
> >>   		return;
> >>   
> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * Even if the ->validation_bits are set for address mask,
> >> +	 * to be extra safe, check and reject an error radius '0',
> >> +	 * and fall back to the default page size.
> >> +	 */
> >> +	if (mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_PA_MASK)
> >> +		lsb = find_first_bit((void *)&mem_err->physical_addr_mask, PAGE_SHIFT);
> >> +	else
> >> +		lsb = PAGE_SHIFT;
> >> +
> >>   	mce_setup(&m);
> >>   	m.bank = -1;
> >>   	/* Fake a memory read error with unknown channel */
> >>   	m.status = MCI_STATUS_VAL | MCI_STATUS_EN | MCI_STATUS_ADDRV | MCI_STATUS_MISCV | 0x9f;
> >> -	m.misc = (MCI_MISC_ADDR_PHYS << 6) | PAGE_SHIFT;
> >> +	m.misc = (MCI_MISC_ADDR_PHYS << 6) | lsb;
> > 
> > LGTM.
> > 
> > I suppose this wants to go upstream via the tree the bug came from (NVDIMM
> > tree? ACPI tree?), or should we pick it up into the x86 tree?
> 
> No idea.  Maintainers?

There's no real NVDIMM dependency here, just a general cleanup of how
APEI error granularities are managed. So I think it is appropriate for
this to go through the x86 tree via the typical path for mce related
topics.