Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756249AbcJWJS6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:18:58 -0400 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([58.251.152.64]:16985 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752161AbcJWJSw (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:18:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8 To: "Abdulhamid, Harb" , Hanjun Guo , Tyler Baicar , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <1475875882-2604-1-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <1475875882-2604-6-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <496ddac3-a220-fd42-5ca1-3d0fb0238907@linaro.org> <1941586c-4c51-60d8-a77a-ad56fe5f3e3f@codeaurora.org> CC: Naveen Kaje , "Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang" From: Hanjun Guo Message-ID: <580C7F38.4010301@huawei.com> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 17:13:28 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1941586c-4c51-60d8-a77a-ad56fe5f3e3f@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.177.17.188] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1886 Lines: 42 Hi Harb, On 2016/10/20 0:59, Abdulhamid, Harb wrote: > On 10/18/2016 8:44 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> Hi Tyler, >> >> On 2016/10/8 5:31, Tyler Baicar wrote: >>> 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. >> Does this SEA is replayed by the firmware (firmware first handling) >> or directly triggered by the hardware when error is happened? > Architecturally, an SEA must be synchronous and *precise*, so if you > take an SEA on a particular load instruction, firmware/hardware should > not be corrupting the context/state of the PE to allow software to > determine which thread/process encountered the abort. GHES error status That's my concern too, and that's why I raised my question :) > block will be expose to software with information about the type, > severity, physical address impacted. > > Generally the error status block is populated by firmware. However, as > long as the above requirement is met, I don't think the spec precludes > error status block being populated by hardware. Those details must be > completely transparent to software. > > Finally, to answer your more specific question: If the implementation > of firmware-first involves trapping the SEA in EL3 to do some firmware > first handling, firmware must maintain the context of the offending ELx, > generate an error record, and then "replay" the exception to normal > (non-secure) software at the appropriate vector base address. > Thank you for your answer, it clears my confusion now, I will try something similar on ARM64 platform, will get back to you if I get blocks. Thanks Hanjun