Hi Tyler,
On 07/12/16 21:48, Tyler Baicar wrote:
> Add support for ARM Common Platform Error Record (CPER).
> UEFI 2.6 specification adds support for ARM specific
> processor error information to be reported as part of the
> CPER records. This provides more detail on for processor error logs.
Looks good to me, a few minor comments below.
Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
> index 8fa4e23..1ac2572 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
> @@ -184,6 +199,110 @@ static void cper_print_proc_generic(const char *pfx,
> printk("%s""IP: 0x%016llx\n", pfx, proc->ip);
> }
>
> +static void cper_print_proc_arm(const char *pfx,
> + const struct cper_sec_proc_arm *proc)
> +{
> + int i, len, max_ctx_type;
> + struct cper_arm_err_info *err_info;
> + struct cper_arm_ctx_info *ctx_info;
> + char newpfx[64];
> +
> + printk("%ssection length: %d\n", pfx, proc->section_length);
Compared to the rest of the file, this:
> printk("%s""section length: %d\n", pfx, proc->section_length);
would be more in keeping. I guess its done this way to avoid some spurious
warning about %ssection not being recognised by printk().
> + printk("%sMIDR: 0x%016llx\n", pfx, proc->midr);
> +
> + len = proc->section_length - (sizeof(*proc) +
> + proc->err_info_num * (sizeof(*err_info)));
> + if (len < 0) {
> + printk("%ssection length is too small\n", pfx);
This calculation is all based on values in the 'struct cper_sec_proc_arm', is it
worth making more noise about how the firmware-generated record is incorrectly
formatted? If we see this message its not the kernel's fault!
> + printk("%sERR_INFO_NUM is %d\n", pfx, proc->err_info_num);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + if (proc->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_VALID_MPIDR)
> + printk("%sMPIDR: 0x%016llx\n", pfx, proc->mpidr);
> + if (proc->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_VALID_AFFINITY_LEVEL)
> + printk("%serror affinity level: %d\n", pfx,
> + proc->affinity_level);
> + if (proc->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_VALID_RUNNING_STATE) {
> + printk("%srunning state: %d\n", pfx, proc->running_state);
This field is described as a bit field in table 260, can we print it as 0x%lx in
case additional bits are set?
> + printk("%sPSCI state: %d\n", pfx, proc->psci_state);
> + }
> +
> + snprintf(newpfx, sizeof(newpfx), "%s%s", pfx, INDENT_SP);
> +
> + err_info = (struct cper_arm_err_info *)(proc + 1);
> + for (i = 0; i < proc->err_info_num; i++) {
> + printk("%sError info structure %d:\n", pfx, i);
> + printk("%sversion:%d\n", newpfx, err_info->version);
> + printk("%slength:%d\n", newpfx, err_info->length);
> + if (err_info->validation_bits &
> + CPER_ARM_INFO_VALID_MULTI_ERR) {
> + if (err_info->multiple_error == 0)
> + printk("%ssingle error\n", newpfx);
> + else if (err_info->multiple_error == 1)
> + printk("%smultiple errors\n", newpfx);
> + else
> + printk("%smultiple errors count:%d\n",
> + newpfx, err_info->multiple_error);
This is described as unsigned in table 261.
> + }
> + if (err_info->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_INFO_VALID_FLAGS) {
> + if (err_info->flags & CPER_ARM_INFO_FLAGS_FIRST)
> + printk("%sfirst error captured\n", newpfx);
> + if (err_info->flags & CPER_ARM_INFO_FLAGS_LAST)
> + printk("%slast error captured\n", newpfx);
> + if (err_info->flags & CPER_ARM_INFO_FLAGS_PROPAGATED)
> + printk("%spropagated error captured\n",
> + newpfx);
Table 261 also has an 'overflow' bit in flags. It may be worth printing a
warning if this is set:
> Note: Overflow bit indicates that firmware/hardware error
> buffers had experience an overflow, and it is possible that
> some error information has been lost.
> + }
> + printk("%serror_type: %d, %s\n", newpfx, err_info->type,
> + err_info->type < ARRAY_SIZE(proc_error_type_strs) ?
> + proc_error_type_strs[err_info->type] : "unknown");
> + if (err_info->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_INFO_VALID_ERR_INFO)
> + printk("%serror_info: 0x%016llx\n", newpfx,
> + err_info->error_info);
> + if (err_info->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_INFO_VALID_VIRT_ADDR)
> + printk("%svirtual fault address: 0x%016llx\n",
> + newpfx, err_info->virt_fault_addr);
> + if (err_info->validation_bits &
> + CPER_ARM_INFO_VALID_PHYSICAL_ADDR)
> + printk("%sphysical fault address: 0x%016llx\n",
> + newpfx, err_info->physical_fault_addr);
> + err_info += 1;
> + }
> + ctx_info = (struct cper_arm_ctx_info *)err_info;
> + max_ctx_type = (sizeof(arm_reg_ctx_strs) /
> + sizeof(arm_reg_ctx_strs[0]) - 1);
ARRAY_SIZE() - 1?
> + for (i = 0; i < proc->context_info_num; i++) {
> + int size = sizeof(*ctx_info) + ctx_info->size;
> +
> + printk("%sContext info structure %d:\n", pfx, i);
> + if (len < size) {
> + printk("%ssection length is too small\n", newpfx);
> + return;
> + }
> + if (ctx_info->type > max_ctx_type) {
> + printk("%sInvalid context type: %d\n", newpfx,
> + ctx_info->type);
> + printk("%sMax context type: %d\n", newpfx,
> + max_ctx_type);
> + return;
> + }
> + printk("%sregister context type %d: %s\n", newpfx,
> + ctx_info->type, arm_reg_ctx_strs[ctx_info->type]);
> + print_hex_dump(newpfx, "", DUMP_PREFIX_OFFSET, 16, 4,
> + (ctx_info + 1), ctx_info->size, 0);
> + len -= size;
> + ctx_info = (struct cper_arm_ctx_info *)((long)ctx_info + size);
> + }
> +
> + if (len > 0) {
> + printk("%sVendor specific error info has %d bytes:\n", pfx,
> + len);
%u - just in case it is surprisingly large!
> + print_hex_dump(newpfx, "", DUMP_PREFIX_OFFSET, 16, 4, ctx_info,
> + len, 0);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static const char * const mem_err_type_strs[] = {
> "unknown",
> "no error",
> @@ -458,6 +577,15 @@ static void cper_estatus_print_section(
> cper_print_pcie(newpfx, pcie, gdata);
> else
> goto err_section_too_small;
> + } else if (!uuid_le_cmp(*sec_type, CPER_SEC_PROC_ARM)) {
> + struct cper_sec_proc_arm *arm_err;
> +
> + arm_err = acpi_hest_generic_data_payload(gdata);
> + printk("%ssection_type: ARM processor error\n", newpfx);
> + if (gdata->error_data_length >= sizeof(*arm_err))
> + cper_print_proc_arm(newpfx, arm_err);
> + else
> + goto err_section_too_small;
> } else
> printk("%s""section type: unknown, %pUl\n", newpfx, sec_type);
>
This is the only processor-specific entry in this function,
CPER_SEC_PROC_{IA,IPF} don't appear anywhere else in the tree.
Is it worth adding an (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM)) in
the if()? This would let the compiler remove cper_print_proc_arm(() on x86/ia64
systems which won't ever see a record of this type.
Thanks!
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
