From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: "linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org"
<linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>,
Matt Fleming
<matt-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
Leif Lindholm
<leif.lindholm-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] efi: arm64: abort boot on pending SError
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:46:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160701154612.GC17071@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu9Pk6xbUUMisAMhd4rpoYHA+wjzrZGkyEUXPdx_TaniVQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 05:31:33PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 1 July 2016 at 17:22, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 05:01:30PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> It is the firmware's job to clear any pending SErrors before entering
> >> the kernel. On UEFI, we can fail gracefully rather than panic during
> >> early boot, so check for this condition in the stub.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
> >
> > An SError could be triggered either asynchronously by FW, or as a result
> > of our actions at any point after this, e.g. due to the filesystem
> > accesses made to load an initrd.
> >
> > So in practice, is checking here useful? Have we seen FW with masked but
> > pending SError at the point we enter the stub rather than that SError
> > being triggered later,?
>
> Yes. EDK2 keeps SError masked throughout its execution by default, and
> so any condition that triggered an SError up till this point is likely
> to still be pending, and blow up the kernel as soon as it unmasks it.
Ok.
> > I'm also not sure what this means for CPER, which may use SError to
> > signal to the OS. It's possible that the UEFI implementation polls
> > ISR_EL1 itself, and handles SError appropriately internally, or that the
> > OS can later deal with the SError based on CPER and friends.
>
> Currently, the kernel panics on an SError, and so what the kernel
> should do once we start dealing with them in a more sophisticated way
> is hypothetical at the moment. Once that code arrives, it may revert
> this change, but for now, being dropped back into the UEFI shell does
> sound more appealing than panic early imo.
Logging something while the UART is available is certainly appealing.
As you say, we can change this later if/when we have more advanced
SError handling. So modulo my prior comments, I guess this is fine for
now.
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-01 15:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-01 15:01 [PATCH 1/2] efi: arm64: abort boot on pending SError Ard Biesheuvel
[not found] ` <1467385291-9880-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2016-07-01 15:01 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: document that pending SErrors are not allowed at kernel entry Ard Biesheuvel
[not found] ` <1467385291-9880-2-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2016-07-01 15:25 ` Mark Rutland
2016-07-01 15:34 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-07-01 15:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] efi: arm64: abort boot on pending SError Mark Rutland
2016-07-01 15:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
[not found] ` <CAKv+Gu9Pk6xbUUMisAMhd4rpoYHA+wjzrZGkyEUXPdx_TaniVQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2016-07-01 15:46 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2016-07-02 10:14 ` Ard Biesheuvel
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=20160701154612.GC17071@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland-5wv7dgnigg8@public.gmane.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org \
--cc=leif.lindholm-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=matt-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org \
/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