From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9048C282CC for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:06:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42BAE217F9 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:06:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 42BAE217F9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 7F4858E00C8; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 11:06:48 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 77BC78E00B1; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 11:06:48 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 61E5B8E00C8; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 11:06:48 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from mail-pf1-f197.google.com (mail-pf1-f197.google.com [209.85.210.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F108E00B1 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 11:06:48 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pf1-f197.google.com with SMTP id l76so5557575pfg.1 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2019 08:06:48 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-original-authentication-results:x-gm-message-state:date:from:to :cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=KdAjhSqA4Qa2x1JYak9IMHAIXHNwyjaoohHWyV1H2mQ=; b=qCTc3yoDSB7OOgpmzZd8EbNL1vMM0NSniRF5PrH4fOiMdgEcicoRucQUn4lt68U7mO V5qABfjRjHIiSYB24/Cgnwvb8yJFUvL3LFs1SWa5GAocxWSqOkeaFktiiYu951u1s9G8 Qm71/DhOk7qJt0a1iWv8lhPHdJLSWJKBwQJ0aePPT5JshUkJiAcSEr7KB/lKml+mbtvN 8jEiA7VRoe8ymySy3OVaeGOJGPhfyTOl7otMfujazP3ywQT7WpuLeJKQTFbbi1tBHknP Pd1OlmtnYo4+MbC44NGwX3bYo9KWtkuBoSmNXHEvo9AMIOfaAnSBPmSU/H8GBPT+UFIl g9KA== X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of keith.busch@intel.com designates 134.134.136.31 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=keith.busch@intel.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYLN1FxVmQ9GNBJX3YN33WYGZP+lbiL8DrFalf7uRTTmD2Ffpqx 4EvQcT+VWrXgNdR0stxKjYxQGOU17zSxYlkrYYGHpJpqDEm1iBBj1OD+0oTzr0kwtmcq9Ll+2fu AodBexzA9bm6EQccqWAap8VOJes3jukGLvK6SX3kCeTKllnklcJyT/1xanHNdq1dmRw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:dc53:: with SMTP id f19mr2483199pgj.406.1549469207514; Wed, 06 Feb 2019 08:06:47 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYU04MUxWqTdbW3KpZmUGsH9yyn7OvzDLXU9Bp+VbTx1opterxhV4gk9cxBFcJoRV951gU+ X-Received: by 2002:a63:dc53:: with SMTP id f19mr2483124pgj.406.1549469206448; Wed, 06 Feb 2019 08:06:46 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1549469206; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=d2U+uQMAVVi6Cuc5smuuIqis1OP2lgA4stH3X6npyi9EhDiYRVDGS4CG5LRS0b2RIB 5tV2nPjWr+fq7ckaK/hqmdiXj2NFb8AOAofm96yB2OXQOeb8QBQZbnzfBQHp05Wme0Fk JkIFVUOFjc2h3UqOmRI6x9D4zVi0KiMs5FIorMnGf/dtgnQ62fh/pxwp0M4T5CUidyFS 9fGaEhrjrkPvxQg4XVyCy/le134q1E5Vmoirz+lKkGbfEhyTcgaRq6pVlXgeSDb70aAg /9UFbGencUYcxuYW0WLLZMcR2t3yz3UzidiyVclhF+ZMhaeFw4TLULJrELBt6S/w+hAM gupA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=KdAjhSqA4Qa2x1JYak9IMHAIXHNwyjaoohHWyV1H2mQ=; b=mowS3P2QZVDwCHzjryTMhDGeFfcuRDxf7kzWRgfxLooIDZgGjJaoNi2TP98tYK0lSN hx6QFxDhrxZNN659QWSFy2qdxcWmnq7e1LzzoYAIlTgQ9ZDL9S5BMc4HGzRoTEjJLYXS SdVFEQBQ9Ltxyj6Xo/aQ3eviYOIDycXyMB/9KX4a7UEhtNEBFBg1Puc346NzHDvjdyfa kyCqOhzDuv0rjf5rlc5O9WsgrVrYR0hIKFTeFFE/bqj96JoV8sCvvLj234UEVpsaE3ZP RPOwNks8uKV8LJuAwSYu0IPTUdV3cSFmyksAUbJR5ojEqpkE66D88RumlJ4GHOruPdKR suWw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of keith.busch@intel.com designates 134.134.136.31 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=keith.busch@intel.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com. [134.134.136.31]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b6si3597942pgd.292.2019.02.06.08.06.46 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Feb 2019 08:06:46 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of keith.busch@intel.com designates 134.134.136.31 as permitted sender) client-ip=134.134.136.31; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of keith.busch@intel.com designates 134.134.136.31 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=keith.busch@intel.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2019 08:06:45 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,340,1544515200"; d="scan'208";a="142077354" Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) ([10.232.112.69]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2019 08:06:44 -0800 Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 09:06:14 -0700 From: Keith Busch To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Rafael Wysocki , Dave Hansen , Dan Williams Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 03/10] acpi/hmat: Parse and report heterogeneous memory Message-ID: <20190206160613.GG28064@localhost.localdomain> References: <20190124230724.10022-1-keith.busch@intel.com> <20190124230724.10022-4-keith.busch@intel.com> <20190206122814.00000127@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190206122814.00000127@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 12:28:14PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 16:07:17 -0700 > Keith Busch wrote: > > > + pr_info("HMAT: Locality: Flags:%02x Type:%s Initiator Domains:%d Target Domains:%d Base:%lld\n", > > + hmat_loc->flags, hmat_data_type(type), ipds, tpds, > > + hmat_loc->entry_base_unit); > > + > > + inits = (u32 *)(hmat_loc + 1); > > + targs = &inits[ipds]; > > This line is a bit of an oddity as it's indexing off the end of the data. > targs = inits + ipds; > would be nicer to my mind as doesn't even hint that we are in inits still. > > > > + entries = (u16 *)(&targs[tpds]); Sure, I can change these to addition rather than indexing. I have no preference either way. > As above I'd prefer we did the pointer arithmetic explicitly rather > than used an index off the end of the array. > > > + for (init = 0; init < ipds; init++) { > > + for (targ = 0; targ < tpds; targ++) { > > + value = entries[init * tpds + targ]; > > + value = (value * hmat_loc->entry_base_unit) / 10; > > + pr_info(" Initiator-Target[%d-%d]:%d%s\n", > > + inits[init], targs[targ], value, > > + hmat_data_type_suffix(type)); > > Worth checking at this early stage that the domains exist in SRAT? > + screaming if they don't. Sure, I think it should be sufficient to check pxm_to_node() for a valid value to validate the table is okay.. > > + } > > + } > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static __init int hmat_parse_cache(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, > > + const unsigned long end) > > +{ > > + struct acpi_hmat_cache *cache = (void *)header; > > + u32 attrs; > > + > > + if (cache->header.length < sizeof(*cache)) { > > + pr_debug("HMAT: Unexpected cache header length: %d\n", > > + cache->header.length); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > + > > + attrs = cache->cache_attributes; > > + pr_info("HMAT: Cache: Domain:%d Size:%llu Attrs:%08x SMBIOS Handles:%d\n", > > + cache->memory_PD, cache->cache_size, attrs, > > + cache->number_of_SMBIOShandles); > > Can we sanity check those smbios handles actually match anything? Will do. > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static int __init hmat_parse_address_range(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, > > + const unsigned long end) > > +{ > > + struct acpi_hmat_address_range *spa = (void *)header; > > + > > + if (spa->header.length != sizeof(*spa)) { > > + pr_debug("HMAT: Unexpected address range header length: %d\n", > > + spa->header.length); > > My gut feeling is that it's much more useful to make this always print rather > than debug. Same with other error paths above. Given the number of times > broken ACPI tables show up, it's nice to complain really loudly! > > Perhaps others prefer to not do so though so I'll defer to subsystem norms. Yeah, I demoted these to debug based on earlier feedback. We should still be operational even with broken HMAT, so I don't want to create unnecessary panic if its broken, but I agree something should be immediately noticable if the firmware tables are incorrect. Maybe like what bad_srat() provides.