On 03/24/2017 10:35 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:48:40AM -0700, Doug Berger wrote: >> On 03/24/2017 08:16 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:46:26AM -0700, Doug Berger wrote: > >> If you would consider an alternative implementation where we scrap >> the SError handler (i.e. maintain the ugliness in our downstream >> kernel) in favor of a more gentle user mode crash on SError that >> allows the kernel the opportunity to service the interrupt for >> diagnostic purposes I could try to repackage that. > > If this is just for diagnostic purposes, I believe you can register a > panic notifier, which can then read from the bus. The panic will occur, > but you'll have the opportunity to log some information to dmesg. And crash the kernel? That sounds awful, FWIW the ARM/Linux kernel is able to recover just fine from user-space accessing e.g: invalid physical addresses in the GISB register space, bringing the same level of functionality to ARM64/Linux sounds reasonable to me. -- Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
