On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 02:14:27PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I think this is just a reflection of what other hardware can do:
> most machines only detect memory errors, but the EDAC subsystem
> can work with any type in principle. There are also a lot of
> conditions elsewhere that can be detected but not corrected.
Just a couple of thoughts from looking at this:
So the EDAC thing reports *hardware* errors by using the RAS
capabilities built into an IP block. So it started with memory
controllers but it is getting extended to other blocks. AMD are looking
at how to integrate GPU hw errors reporting into it, for example.
Looking at that CBB thing, it looks like it is supposed to report not
so much hardware errors but operational errors. Some of the hw errors
reported by RAS hw are also operation-related but not the majority.
Then, EDAC has this counters exposed in:
$ grep -r . /sys/devices/system/edac/
/sys/devices/system/edac/power/runtime_active_time:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/power/runtime_status:unsupported
/sys/devices/system/edac/power/runtime_suspended_time:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/power/control:auto
/sys/devices/system/edac/pci/edac_pci_log_pe:1
/sys/devices/system/edac/pci/pci0/pe_count:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/pci/pci0/npe_count:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/pci/pci_parity_count:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/pci/pci_nonparity_count:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/pci/edac_pci_log_npe:1
/sys/devices/system/edac/pci/edac_pci_panic_on_pe:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/pci/check_pci_errors:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/mc/power/runtime_active_time:0
/sys/devices/system/edac/mc/power/runtime_status:unsupported
...
with the respective hierarchy: memory controllers, PCI errors, etc.
So the main question is, does it make sense for you to fit this into the
EDAC hierarchy and what would even be the advantage of making it part of
EDAC?
HTH.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
