Smita Koralahalli wrote:
> On 1/2/2024 8:30 AM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > Smita Koralahalli wrote:
> >> In preparation to add tracepoint support, move protocol error UUID
> >> definition to a common location and make CXL RAS capability struct
> >> global for use across different modules.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.h b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.h
> >> index 86bfcf7909ec..6f8c00495708 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.h
> >> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper_cxl.h
> >> @@ -7,14 +7,11 @@
> >> * Author: Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@xxxxxxx>
> >> */
> >>
> >> +#include <linux/cxl-event.h>
> >> +
> >> #ifndef LINUX_CPER_CXL_H
> >> #define LINUX_CPER_CXL_H
> >>
> >> -/* CXL Protocol Error Section */
> >> -#define CPER_SEC_CXL_PROT_ERR \
> >> - GUID_INIT(0x80B9EFB4, 0x52B5, 0x4DE3, 0xA7, 0x77, 0x68, 0x78, \
> >> - 0x4B, 0x77, 0x10, 0x48)
> >> -
> >> #pragma pack(1)
> >>
> >> /* Compute Express Link Protocol Error Section, UEFI v2.10 sec N.2.13 */
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/cper.h b/include/linux/cper.h
> >> index c1a7dc325121..2cbf0a93785a 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/cper.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/cper.h
> >> @@ -89,6 +89,10 @@ enum {
> >> #define CPER_NOTIFY_DMAR \
> >> GUID_INIT(0x667DD791, 0xC6B3, 0x4c27, 0x8A, 0x6B, 0x0F, 0x8E, \
> >> 0x72, 0x2D, 0xEB, 0x41)
> >> +/* CXL Protocol Error Section */
> >> +#define CPER_SEC_CXL_PROT_ERR \
> >> + GUID_INIT(0x80B9EFB4, 0x52B5, 0x4DE3, 0xA7, 0x77, 0x68, 0x78, \
> >> + 0x4B, 0x77, 0x10, 0x48)
> >
> > Is this shared with code outside of GHES? I did not need my GUID defines
> > outside of ghes.c and further becuase the events are defined as UUID's I
> > chose to keep the GUID definition as local as possible to ghes.c.
> >
> > Can you do the same with this define?
>
> Actually, it is shared with efi/cper.
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.7-rc8/source/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c#L602
Ah ok.
>
> But this would be something to look into. Should we continue to support
> logging from efi/cper or just confine it to ghes..
I missed that you were not removing the efi/cper print. I kind of thought
that was part of the series.
>
> If we just log it from ghes similar to component events, we might loose
> error records from RCH Downstream Port and other agent_types which do
> not log device_ids.
That is a good reason to keep the efi/cper print AFAICS.
> Also, I'm not sure how useful are other fields in
> protocol error CPER, the ones like Capability struct and DVSEC len etc
> as the tracepoints doesn't log all of them.
I'm not sure about their importance but if they are important I would say
they should be added to the tracepoint.
Ira
