Re: [PATCH 3/4] acpi/ghes, efi/cper: Recognize and process CXL Protocol Errors.

[Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>]

On 1/2/2024 9:58 AM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> Smita Koralahalli wrote:
>> UEFI v2.10 section N.2.13 defines a CPER record for CXL Protocol errors.
>>
>> Add GHES support to detect CXL CPER Protocol record and cache error
>> severity, device_id, serial number and a pointer to CXL RAS capability
>> struct in struct cxl_cper_rec_data.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c        | 15 ++++++++++
>>   drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   include/linux/cxl-event.h       |  6 ++++
>>   3 files changed, 73 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> index d6a85fbc0a8b..6471584b2e79 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> @@ -714,6 +714,18 @@ static void cxl_cper_post_event(enum cxl_event_type event_type,
>>   		cper_callback(event_type, &data);
>>   }
>>   
>> +void cxl_cper_handle_prot_err(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata)
>> +{
>> +	struct cxl_cper_rec_data data;
>> +
>> +	memset(&data, 0, sizeof(data));
> 
> Does this need to be done?  Could cxl_cper_handle_prot_err_info() use
> something like this initially?
> 
> 	*data = (struct cxl_cper_rec_data) {
> 		.rec.hdr.dev_serial_num.lower_dw = prot_err->dev_serial_num.lower_dw;
> 		.rec.hdr.dev_serial_num.upper_dw = prot_err->dev_serial_num.upper_dw;
> 	};
> 
> The serial number is always set even if it is not valid.

Ok will copy serial number at the beginning of 
cxl_cper_handle_prot_err_info() and remove memset.

> 
>> +
>> +	if (cxl_cper_handle_prot_err_info(gdata, &data))
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	data.severity = gdata->error_severity;
>> +}
>> +
>>   int cxl_cper_register_callback(cxl_cper_callback callback)
>>   {
>>   	guard(rwsem_write)(&cxl_cper_rw_sem);
>> @@ -768,6 +780,9 @@ static bool ghes_do_proc(struct ghes *ghes,
>>   		else if (guid_equal(sec_type, &CPER_SEC_PROC_ARM)) {
>>   			queued = ghes_handle_arm_hw_error(gdata, sev);
>>   		}
>> +		else if (guid_equal(sec_type, &CPER_SEC_CXL_PROT_ERR)) {
>> +			cxl_cper_handle_prot_err(gdata);
>> +		}
>>   		else if (guid_equal(sec_type, &CPER_SEC_CXL_GEN_MEDIA_GUID)) {
>>   			struct cxl_cper_event_rec *rec = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
>>   
>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.c
>> index 4fd8d783993e..3bc0b9f28c9e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.c
>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.c
>> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>>    */
>>   
>>   #include <linux/cper.h>
>> +#include <acpi/ghes.h>
>>   #include "cper_cxl.h"
>>   
>>   #define PROT_ERR_VALID_AGENT_TYPE		BIT_ULL(0)
>> @@ -176,3 +177,54 @@ void cper_print_prot_err(const char *pfx, const struct cper_sec_prot_err *prot_e
>>   			       sizeof(cxl_ras->header_log), 0);
>>   	}
>>   }
>> +
>> +int cxl_cper_handle_prot_err_info(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata,
>> +				  struct cxl_cper_rec_data *data)
>> +{
>> +	struct cper_sec_prot_err *prot_err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
>> +	struct cper_cxl_event_devid *device_id = &data->rec.hdr.device_id;
>> +	struct cper_cxl_event_sn *dev_serial_num =  &data->rec.hdr.dev_serial_num;
>> +	size_t size = sizeof(*prot_err) + prot_err->dvsec_len;
>> +
>> +	if (!(prot_err->valid_bits & PROT_ERR_VALID_ERROR_LOG)) {
>> +		pr_err(FW_WARN "Not a valid protocol error log\n");
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (!(prot_err->valid_bits & PROT_ERR_VALID_DEVICE_ID)) {
>> +		pr_err(FW_WARN "Not a valid Device ID\n");
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * The device ID or agent address is only valid for CXL 1.1 device,
>> +	 * CXL 2.0 device, CXL 2.0 Logical device, CXL 2.0 Fabric Manager
>> +	 * Managed Logical Device, CXL Root Port, CXL Downstream Switch
>> +	 * Port, or CXL Upstream Switch Port.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (prot_err->agent_type <= 0x7 && prot_err->agent_type != RCH_DP) {
>> +		device_id->segment_num = prot_err->agent_addr.segment;
>> +		device_id->bus_num = prot_err->agent_addr.bus;
>> +		device_id->device_num = prot_err->agent_addr.device;
>> +		device_id->func_num = prot_err->agent_addr.function;
>> +	} else {
>> +		pr_err(FW_WARN "Not a valid agent type\n");
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * The device serial number is only valid for CXL 1.1 device, CXL
>> +	 * 2.0 device, CXL 2.0 Logical device, or CXL 2.0 Fabric Manager
>> +	 * Managed Logical Device.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (!(prot_err->valid_bits & PROT_ERR_VALID_SERIAL_NUMBER) ||
>> +	      prot_err->agent_type > 0x4 || prot_err->agent_type == RCH_DP)
>> +		pr_warn(FW_WARN "No valid serial number present\n");
>> +
>> +	dev_serial_num->lower_dw = prot_err->dev_serial_num.lower_dw;
>> +	dev_serial_num->upper_dw = prot_err->dev_serial_num.upper_dw;
>> +
>> +	data->cxl_ras = (struct cxl_ras_capability_regs *)((long)prot_err + size);
> 
> I think this is ok now because the cxl trace code processes the data
> before returning (in next patch).  But I'm a bit leary about passing a
> pointer to data controlled by the acpi sub-system.  At some point the
> event may get cached to be processed by another thread and it might be
> better to copy the struct here.

Ok will make the changes. Rewrote the struct in patch 1.

> 
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> diff --git a/include/linux/cxl-event.h b/include/linux/cxl-event.h
>> index 90d8390a73cb..7ba2dfd6619e 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/cxl-event.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/cxl-event.h
>> @@ -154,11 +154,17 @@ struct cxl_ras_capability_regs {
>>   
>>   struct cxl_cper_rec_data {
>>   	struct cxl_cper_event_rec rec;
>> +	struct cxl_ras_capability_regs *cxl_ras;
>> +	int severity;
> 
> NIT: When I saw this without any addition to event type I wondered if the
> series would bisect.  I see it does because the record is not sent until
> the next patch.  But I wonder if the 2 patches would be best reversed.

You mean to say patch 4 to be 3 and 3 to be 4?

And since I haven't used severity yet,  fix it by declaring severity to 
where it is used..

> 
> Also, should cxl_ras + severity be put in a protocol error sub-struct?
> Does severity ever apply to event records?

No, not in any of the component event records. Only place is in "Event 
Record Flags" in Common Event Record Format (Table 8-42).

Addressed in patch 1 to make a sub-struct.

Thanks,
Smita

> 
> Ira
> 
>>   };
>>   
>>   typedef void (*cxl_cper_callback)(enum cxl_event_type type,
>>   				  struct cxl_cper_rec_data *data);
>>   
>> +struct acpi_hest_generic_data;
>> +int cxl_cper_handle_prot_err_info(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata,
>> +				  struct cxl_cper_rec_data *data);
>> +
>>   #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_GHES
>>   int cxl_cper_register_callback(cxl_cper_callback callback);
>>   int cxl_cper_unregister_callback(cxl_cper_callback callback);
>> -- 
>> 2.17.1
>>
> 
>