From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.14]) (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 6322386250; Tue, 29 Jul 2025 05:42:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753767726; cv=none; b=Jw3OR37insU9v520WQNYY9IGEqBZ4uDGaepuZtqFFnTNrq7y/BQKJMrykuUfTVhJZWDwwOsxgXM9OdoTB5fds4ZEiqiaXMYy6Wxc1DkRrCFkJeV5hCMn87m9p5jdRdf7qiMduhSlOwEaINXirx7ud5iY/dCqVr1GA6jzmDDYtGo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753767726; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zW+H0+MpviuGnEP+uGGy+bWOqykVTj+bOH8fIF6/mRc=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=pi/xuoLYk+jvhosx+LP2rEzgTZGMeMYADW0Jk00vJmBOt9QDbGxEiqsDERFCJroFbQH4GKvwC8W+rNS1JoidfafYpLevok/HbvZMaXXeYxGAJbD/cw6CMwFKh4gRc/Xw56Ure6a1d3G8HZrqaFBlTcjXijJjIIEFdPQkUcPQPTg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=M6kfYEMm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="M6kfYEMm" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1753767724; x=1785303724; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zW+H0+MpviuGnEP+uGGy+bWOqykVTj+bOH8fIF6/mRc=; b=M6kfYEMmQK2r+Y+cYn/QpOkEO0OXuI5NZBZRsvvZHdLHIQmJSitlVUMG jBYzq2YXGMWTD5J9Vu7ewQxeGV2Z6wHzIyJhJBWfwVrxY/bTK/dDxgVEj 8OJQT+VgFDYKk8tbbuTAoPs23qErdNnvx+nuhZX9F8qNOnl2chKGCHKoH XPayPSnqcD4IakNJsr/cjmf8AhMYmwqURsbllIbFR9FN3XKvFf6jui/H1 dGsundTelmfyjkwXWiyfCnOIBhJ2kC8RLIK4gyIsi71Quwf3WnTPQB1WF Hrks5nl/bk6zTrMqjB7u5icLO8FF7tdk+s8rx/I2XfThW/XHE1P/KPmg1 Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: xLG2MfE6S+Ws92wckTW9QQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: A78qoROPSQmQlDmG2Zcl/A== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11505"; a="59829002" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,348,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="59829002" Received: from fmviesa010.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.150]) by orvoesa106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Jul 2025 22:42:03 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 0WTSdhJRQRqeVvlEQdiLjQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: wbhnLJhNSBmvcP/WZSLqcw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,348,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="163384314" Received: from kmlindbe-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.125.192.163]) ([10.125.192.163]) by fmviesa010-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Jul 2025 22:42:03 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2025 22:41:54 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: "invalid agent type: 1" in acpi/ghes, cper: Recognize and cache CXL Protocol errors To: "Koralahalli Channabasappa, Smita" , linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org Cc: Ard Biesheuvel , Alison Schofield , Vishal Verma , Ira Weiny , Dan Williams , Jonathan Cameron , Yazen Ghannam , Terry Bowman , Dave Jiang , tony.luck@intel.com, Gregory Price References: <20250123084421.127697-1-Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com> <20250123084421.127697-5-Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com> <074f5f77-7bef-4857-97fe-b68ee9b0afaf@linux.intel.com> Content-Language: en-GB From: Marc Herbert In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2025-07-28 09:25, Koralahalli Channabasappa, Smita wrote: > On 7/22/2025 12:24 PM, Marc Herbert wrote: >> The code below triggers the error "invalid agent type: 1" in Intel >> validation (internal issue 15018133056) >> >> It's not clear to anyone we asked why you did not include RCH_DP in >> the `switch (prot_err->agent_type)` in cxl_cper_post_prot_err() below. >> >> I can see how RCH_DP is special in cxl_cper_PRINT_prot_err() and I can >> even understand (despite my near-zero CPER knowledge) some of the >> special cases there. But in cxl_cper_post_prot_err() here, it's not >> clear why RCH_DP would be rejected. Could this be an oversight? If not, >> a comment with a short explanation would not hurt. >> > > You're right. RCH_DP was excluded because it doesn’t report a valid > SBDF in the CPER record. Instead, it provides only the RCRB base > address. > > I haven't thoroughly investigated whether SBDF can be reliably derived > from the RCRB base. There might be a platform-specific mechanism for > that, but at the time, it seemed non-trivial to implement. Introducing > additional infrastructure solely to support RCH_DP felt like it was > adding more complexity. > > I agree that a brief comment explaining this rationale would help. I'm > okay if you plan to include a fixup for this along with the one for > the device serial number. If I understood you correctly, I think a different error message would be much better than a comment. Like this? --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c @@ -730,6 +730,9 @@ static void cxl_cper_post_prot_err(struct cxl_cper_sec_prot_err *prot_err, memcpy(&wd.ras_cap, cap_start, sizeof(wd.ras_cap)); wd.severity = cper_severity_to_aer(severity); break; + case RCH_DP: + pr_err_ratelimited("CXL CPER agent type unsupported: RCH_DP\n"); + return; default: pr_err_ratelimited("CXL CPER invalid agent type: %d\n", prot_err->agent_type);