Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751990AbdF0H0e (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2017 03:26:34 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:38233 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751510AbdF0H03 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2017 03:26:29 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 09:25:55 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Xie XiuQi Cc: tbaicar@codeaurora.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, james.morse@arm.com, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, bristot@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, zhengqiang10@huawei.com, shiju.jose@huawei.com, fu.wei@linaro.org, wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] trace: ras: add ARM processor error information trace event Message-ID: <20170627072555.m5ogmljp7f6lf6fu@pd.tnic> References: <1498275503-137890-1-git-send-email-xiexiuqi@huawei.com> <20170626140647.anigiqhk3l6ltet7@pd.tnic> <22ba6506-1031-437b-95ae-c26773ff84b7@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <22ba6506-1031-437b-95ae-c26773ff84b7@huawei.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1567 Lines: 38 On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 02:51:22PM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote: > How about we report the full info via arm_err_info_event which just for someone > who want the detail information, and leave arm_event closed. If someone do not > care the error detail, who could just open arm_event. So the way I read the spec is, an error event is being described by the Processor Error section and then it "may contain multiple instances of error information structures associated to a single error event." So you can't leave the arm_event thing closed because it describes the event. If you want to merge the two, then sure, by all means, change arm_event to contain some of the processor error info structure. It wouldn't matter too much as this tracepoint is not fully cast in stone yet. Bottomline is, you want to carry as much information to userspace as possible in order to handle the error properly. But not more - you don't need redundant information because then that bloats the whole machinery around transporting and processing error records and you don't want that in critical situations where you want to act as quickly and as lean as possible. And "handle properly" means any and all actions which the kernel or user needs to do to prolong the system lifetime or be able to reliably schedule maintenance as to replace the faulty hw component. And so on and so on... So it all comes down to what RAS actions you guys wanna do on ARM. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) --