On 9/26/23 3:22 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 03:01:26PM -0500, Ben Cheatham wrote: >> Add support for CXL EINJ error types for CXL 1.1 hosts added in ACPI >> v6.5. Because these error types target memory-mapped CXL 1.1 compliant >> downstream ports and not physical (normal/persistent) memory, these >> error types are not currently allowed through the memory range >> validation done by the EINJ driver. >> >> The MMIO address of a CXL 1.1 downstream port can be found in the >> cxl_rcrb_addr file in the corresponding dport directory under >> /sys/bus/cxl/devices/portX. CXL 1.1 error types follow the same >> procedure as a memory error type, but with param1 set to the >> downstream port MMIO address. >> >> Example usage: >> $ cd /sys/kernel/debug/apei/einj >> $ cat available_error_type >> 0x00000008 Memory Correctable >> 0x00000010 Memory Uncorrectable non-fatal >> 0x00000020 Memory Uncorrectable fatal >> 0x00000040 PCI Express Correctable >> 0x00000080 PCI Express Uncorrectable non-fatal >> 0x00000100 PCI Express Uncorrectable fatal >> 0x00008000 CXL.mem Protocol Correctable >> 0x00020000 CXL.mem Protocol Uncorrectable fatal >> $ echo 0x8000 > error_type >> $ echo 0xfffffffffffff000 > param2 >> $ echo 0x2 > flags >> $ cat /sys/bus/cxl/devices/portX/dportY/cxl_rcrb_addr >> 0xb2f00000 >> $ echo 0xb2f00000 > param1 > > It seems sort of unpleasant to expose the physical base address of the > RCRB. Is there any way to use a device address or other logical > identifier instead and keep the actual MMIO address internal? E.g., a > PCI device has a <domain>:<bus>:<device>.<function> address. I assume > CXL addresses would look similar? > I have the MMIO address of the dport exposed here because the ACPI spec says that the address is expected for CXL 1.1 errors and I wanted to match the spec. For CXL 2.0 errors the SBDF is expected as you described. >> $ echo 1 > error_inject >> ... > >> +static int is_valid_cxl_addr(u64 addr) > > Maybe the function name should include a hint that this should be an > RCRB address? But I don't claim to know the CXL architecture or > nomenclature. > Good point, if I keep this function in v6 I'll make the name more descriptive. > Bjorn
