linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com>
Cc: <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mm@kvack.org>, <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	<vishal.l.verma@intel.com>, <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
	<bp@alien8.de>, <dave.jiang@intel.com>, <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	<ira.weiny@intel.com>, <james.morse@arm.com>,
	<linmiaohe@huawei.com>, <mchehab@kernel.org>,
	<nao.horiguchi@gmail.com>, <rric@kernel.org>,
	<tony.luck@intel.com>, <shiju.jose@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] cxl/core: introduce device reporting poison hanlding
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 16:46:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240827164610.00002f4d@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240808151328.707869-2-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com>

On Thu,  8 Aug 2024 23:13:27 +0800
Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:

> CXL device can find&report memory problems, even before MCE is detected
> by CPU.  AFAIK, the current kernel only traces POISON error event
> from FW-First/OS-First path, but it doesn't handle them, neither
> notify processes who are using the POISON page like MCE does.
> 
> Thus, user have to read logs from trace and find out which device
> reported the error and which applications are affected.  That is not
> an easy work and cannot be handled in time. 

These are async reports, so I'm not sure what 'in time' really means here.
If we get synchronous poison from a processor access it will be handled
via traditional means (MCE, ARM SEA etc)

Whether to handle async error reports (typically from scrub or because
the memory device received poison from someone else) the same way
should perhaps be a policy decision.  It should match what we do
for firmware first async reports though (any policy controls make sense
for both).

An example of this would be that an host OS might attempt a polite close
of an application might attempt a polite if we know there is poison
somewhere in a dataset it has access to. If that poison is never seen
synchronously (because that data is not read) then it my close
successfully rather than being killed.

If it's injected poison and we didn't see it synchronously we might
well not want to kill anything.

> Thus, it is needed to add
> the feature to make the work done automatically and quickly.  Once CXL
> device reports the POISON error (via FW-First/OS-First), kernel
> handles it immediately, similar to the flow when a MCE is triggered.
> 
> The current call trace of error reporting&handling looks like this:
> ```
> 1.  MCE (interrupt #18, while CPU consuming POISON)
>      -> do_machine_check()
>        -> mce_log()
>          -> notify chain (x86_mce_decoder_chain)
>            -> memory_failure()  
> 
> 2.a FW-First (optional, CXL device proactively find&report)
>      -> CXL device -> Firmware
>        -> OS: ACPI->APEI->GHES->CPER -> CXL driver -> trace  
>                                                   \-> memory_failure()
>                                                       ^----- ADD
> 2.b OS-First (optional, CXL device proactively find&report)
>      -> CXL device -> MSI
>        -> OS: CXL driver -> trace  
>                         \-> memory_failure()
>                             ^------------------------------- ADD
> ```
> This patch adds calling memory_failure() while CXL device reporting
> error is received, marked as "ADD" in figure above.

Typo in patch title.  handling
I've also dropped qemu-devel as this doesn't have anything to do with qemu.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com>

Experienced RAS folk in the CC, how do you want this to work for
asynchoronous memory errors on CXL devices?




  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-08-27 15:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-08 15:13 [PATCH v4 0/2] cxl: add device reporting poison handler Shiyang Ruan
2024-08-08 15:13 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] cxl/core: introduce device reporting poison hanlding Shiyang Ruan
2024-08-08 18:28   ` Fan Ni
2024-08-21 13:57     ` Shiyang Ruan
2024-08-27 15:46   ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2024-09-02 14:03     ` Shiyang Ruan
2024-08-08 15:13 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] cxl: avoid duplicated report from MCE & device Shiyang Ruan
2024-08-09  7:31   ` kernel test robot
2024-08-09  7:31   ` kernel test robot
2024-08-09 11:48   ` kernel test robot
2024-08-27 15:52   ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-09-02 14:19     ` Shiyang Ruan

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=20240827164610.00002f4d@Huawei.com \
    --to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
    --cc=nao.horiguchi@gmail.com \
    --cc=rric@kernel.org \
    --cc=ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com \
    --cc=shiju.jose@huawei.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=vishal.l.verma@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).