Re: [PATCH RFC] RAS: hwerr_tracking: move recoverable hardware error tracking out of vmcoreinfo

[Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>]

On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 11:35:17AM -0700, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 09:53:34AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > The current vmcoreinfo implementation defaults to enabled, so I wanted to
> > preserve that behavior to avoid silently removing symbols that existing
> > tools may depend on. Would you prefer a different default?
> 
> You do know Linus' stance on enabling things by default which are not
> ubiquitous, right?

Oh yea, I am familiar with it. :-)

> Logging hw errors in vmcore is really necessary to be enabled everywhere?

I am happy to make it no, if we transform it to a KCONFIG. Right now it
is not a Kconfig, so, it comes with VMCORE set of exported fields.

> > I agree the sysfs exposure duplicates existing infrastructure, points
> > taken. However, tracking fatal hardware errors provides value at crash
> > analysis time—it lets us quickly determine whether a fatal hardware
> > error occurred during the kernel's lifetime, which is useful for
> > root-cause attribution.
> 
> Yes, that's why you put it in vmcore. You can't read sysfs if you encounter
> a fatal hw error.

Ack. Right now it is not tracking fatal error (just recoverable error),
although I think it is a good idea to also track Fatal error (of course
that not on sysfs).

> > For this, would you like to keep it in vmcore info (as of today), or
> > move to RAS subsystem?
> 
> You mean, would I like to pay attention to more patches than now?
>
> Not really - I can barely manage as it is.

Come one Borislav, we need your insights/review/opinions here as well.
:-)