Hi Shuuichirou,
Thank you for your feedback!
On 12/9/2021 3:10 AM, ishii.shuuichir@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi, Tyler.
We would like to make a few comments.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tyler Baicar <baicar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2021 2:07 AM
To: patches@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; abdulhamid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
darren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx; will@xxxxxxxxxx;
maz@xxxxxxxxxx; james.morse@xxxxxxx; alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx;
suzuki.poulose@xxxxxxx; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx; guohanjun@xxxxxxxxxx;
sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx; rafael@xxxxxxxxxx; lenb@xxxxxxxxxx;
tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx; bp@xxxxxxxxx; mark.rutland@xxxxxxx;
anshuman.khandual@xxxxxxx; vincenzo.frascino@xxxxxxx;
tabba@xxxxxxxxxx; marcan@xxxxxxxxx; keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
jthierry@xxxxxxxxxx; masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx; samitolvanen@xxxxxxxxxx;
john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx; daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx; gor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
zhangshaokun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; tmricht@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx;
tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-edac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ishii, Shuuichirou/石井
周一郎 <ishii.shuuichir@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Vineeth.Pillai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Tyler Baicar <baicar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ACPI/AEST: Initial AEST driver
Add support for parsing the ARM Error Source Table and basic handling of
errors reported through both memory mapped and system register interfaces.
Assume system register interfaces are only registered with private
peripheral interrupts (PPIs); otherwise there is no guarantee the
core handling the error is the core which took the error and has the
syndrome info in its system registers.
Add logging for all detected errors and trigger a kernel panic if there is
any uncorrected error present.
Signed-off-by: Tyler Baicar <baicar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
[...]
+static int __init aest_init_node(struct acpi_aest_hdr *node)
+{
+ union acpi_aest_processor_data *proc_data;
+ union aest_node_spec *node_spec;
+ struct aest_node_data *data;
+ int ret;
+
+ data = kzalloc(sizeof(struct aest_node_data), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!data)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ data->node_type = node->type;
+
+ node_spec = ACPI_ADD_PTR(union aest_node_spec, node,
node->node_specific_offset);
+
+ switch (node->type) {
+ case ACPI_AEST_PROCESSOR_ERROR_NODE:
+ memcpy(&data->data, node_spec, sizeof(struct
acpi_aest_processor));
+ break;
+ case ACPI_AEST_MEMORY_ERROR_NODE:
+ memcpy(&data->data, node_spec, sizeof(struct
acpi_aest_memory));
+ break;
+ case ACPI_AEST_SMMU_ERROR_NODE:
+ memcpy(&data->data, node_spec, sizeof(struct
acpi_aest_smmu));
+ break;
+ case ACPI_AEST_VENDOR_ERROR_NODE:
+ memcpy(&data->data, node_spec, sizeof(struct
acpi_aest_vendor));
+ break;
+ case ACPI_AEST_GIC_ERROR_NODE:
+ memcpy(&data->data, node_spec, sizeof(struct
acpi_aest_gic));
+ break;
+ default:
+ kfree(data);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ if (node->type == ACPI_AEST_PROCESSOR_ERROR_NODE) {
+ proc_data = ACPI_ADD_PTR(union acpi_aest_processor_data,
node_spec,
+ sizeof(acpi_aest_processor));
+
+ switch (data->data.processor.resource_type) {
+ case ACPI_AEST_CACHE_RESOURCE:
+ memcpy(&data->proc_data, proc_data,
+ sizeof(struct acpi_aest_processor_cache));
+ break;
+ case ACPI_AEST_TLB_RESOURCE:
+ memcpy(&data->proc_data, proc_data,
+ sizeof(struct acpi_aest_processor_tlb));
+ break;
+ case ACPI_AEST_GENERIC_RESOURCE:
+ memcpy(&data->proc_data, proc_data,
+ sizeof(struct acpi_aest_processor_generic));
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+
+ ret = aest_init_interface(node, data);
+ if (ret) {
+ kfree(data);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ return aest_init_interrupts(node, data);
If aest_init_interrupts() failed, is it necessary to release
the data pointer acquired by kzalloc?
aest_init_interrupts() returns an error if any of the interrupts in the
interrupt list fails, but it's possible that some interrupts in the list
registered successfully. So we attempt to keep chugging along in that
scenario because some interrupts may be enabled and registered with the
interface successfully. If any interrupt registration fails, there will
be a print notifying that there was a failure when initializing that node.
+}
+
+static void aest_count_ppi(struct acpi_aest_hdr *node)
+{
+ struct acpi_aest_node_interrupt *interrupt;
+ int i;
+
+ interrupt = ACPI_ADD_PTR(struct acpi_aest_node_interrupt, node,
+ node->node_interrupt_offset);
+
+ for (i = 0; i < node->node_interrupt_count; i++, interrupt++) {
+ if (interrupt->gsiv >= 16 && interrupt->gsiv < 32)
+ num_ppi++;
+ }
+}
+
+static int aest_starting_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < num_ppi; i++)
+ enable_percpu_irq(ppi_irqs[i], IRQ_TYPE_NONE);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int aest_dying_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
+{
Wouldn't it be better to execute disable_percpu_irq(), which is paired
with enable_percpu_irq(), in aest_dying_cpu()?
Good point. I will add that in the next version.
Thanks,
Tyler
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
