Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753779AbdGUNk0 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:40:26 -0400 Received: from ec2-52-27-115-49.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com ([52.27.115.49]:41840 "EHLO osg.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751065AbdGUNkM (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:40:12 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 10:40:01 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Borislav Petkov Cc: "Kani, Toshimitsu" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mchehab@kernel.org" , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ghes_edac: add platform check to enable ghes_edac Message-ID: <20170721104001.3cd2b884@vento.lan> In-Reply-To: <20170721133441.GB5036@nazgul.tnic> References: <20170717215912.26070-1-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20170717215912.26070-4-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20170718060007.GB8736@nazgul.tnic> <1500407379.2042.21.camel@hpe.com> <20170718181545.32bd9181@vento.lan> <1500481869.2042.29.camel@hpe.com> <20170720043344.GC14367@nazgul.tnic> <1500579646.2042.37.camel@hpe.com> <20170721133441.GB5036@nazgul.tnic> Organization: Samsung X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 641 Lines: 18 Em Fri, 21 Jul 2017 15:34:41 +0200 Borislav Petkov escreveu: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 07:50:03PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > GHES / firmware-first still requires OS recovery actions when an error > > cannot be corrected by the platform. They are handled by ghes_proc(), > > and ghes_edac remains its error-reporting wrapper. What happens when the error can be corrected? Does it still report it to userspace, or just silently hide the error? If I remember well about a past discussion with some vendor, I was told that the firmware can hide some errors from being reported. Is it still the case? Thanks, Mauro