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

Ingo Molnar
2022-08-03T08:53:18Z

* Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com> wrote:

> With Commit 7917f9cdb503 ("acpi/nfit: rely on mce->misc to determine

s/Commit/commit

> 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?

Thanks,

Ingo