"Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Hello Punit,
>
>
> On 10/12/2016 12:00 PM, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>> Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> ARM APEI extension proposal added SEA (Synchrounous External
>>> Abort) notification type for ARMv8.
>>> Add a new GHES error source handling function for SEA. If an error
>>> source's notification type is SEA, then this function can be registered
>>> into the SEA exception handler. That way GHES will parse and report
>>> SEA exceptions when they occur.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang <zjzhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Naveen Kaje <nkaje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> This patch fails to apply for me on v4.8. Is there a different tree this
>> is based on?
> This patch was giving me some grief as well. I'm not sure why that is
> because this patchset was based on the 4.8 kernel with the dependent
> patch for initial APEI support.
That explains it!. I've missed out the dependency called out in the
cover letter.
>> One comment below.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>>> index c8488f1..28d5a09 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>>> @@ -50,6 +50,10 @@
>>> #include <acpi/apei.h>
>>> #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_SEA
>>> +#include <asm/system_misc.h>
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> #include "apei-internal.h"
>>> #define GHES_PFX "GHES: "
>>> @@ -779,6 +783,62 @@ static struct notifier_block ghes_notifier_sci = {
>>> .notifier_call = ghes_notify_sci,
>>> };
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_SEA
>>> +static LIST_HEAD(ghes_sea);
>>> +
>>> +static int ghes_notify_sea(struct notifier_block *this,
>>> + unsigned long event, void *data)
>>> +{
>>> + struct ghes *ghes;
>>> + int ret = NOTIFY_DONE;
>>> +
>>> + rcu_read_lock();
>>> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(ghes, &ghes_sea, list) {
>>> + if (!ghes_proc(ghes))
>>> + ret = NOTIFY_OK;
>> Not something you've introduced but it looks like ghes_proc erroneously
>> never returns anything other than 0. I plan to post the below fix to
>> address it.
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> index 60746ef..caea575 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
>> @@ -662,7 +662,7 @@ static int ghes_proc(struct ghes *ghes)
>> ghes_do_proc(ghes, ghes->estatus);
>> out:
>> ghes_clear_estatus(ghes);
>> - return 0;
>> + return rc;
>> }
> Yes, this definitely should be fixed :)
>
> Thanks,
> Tyler
>>> + }
>>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>> [...]
>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
