Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-20289-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 18:32:09 -0800
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, Smita Koralahalli
	<Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>, Jonathan Cameron
	<Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
CC: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, Shiju Jose
	<shiju.jose@huawei.com>, Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>, "Davidlohr
 Bueso" <dave@stgolabs.net>, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>, "Alison
 Schofield" <alison.schofield@intel.com>, Vishal Verma
	<vishal.l.verma@intel.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	<linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, "Bjorn
 Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] efi/cxl-cper: Report CPER CXL component events
 through trace events
Message-ID: <659cb0295ac1_8d749294b@iweiny-mobl.notmuch>
References: <20231220-cxl-cper-v5-0-1bb8a4ca2c7a@intel.com>
 <20240108165855.00002f5a@Huawei.com>
 <eefc5888-4610-8e39-61ed-2d84e9ebf255@amd.com>
 <659caa8da651c_127da22947b@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <659caa8da651c_127da22947b@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?PPq1lw5+fyDMJ2GLZWp8cyY0+kfbrrgQUmtG2R03m7i8sBwloySFNDI7c36W?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?OYabQcxCJawKEqlmu4hoJbwtF+FnYiJpiBw3Mm1meCbe4rkNCG5j1u7ti7JM?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?P2M5lLe2hwToFG4oqlNBYH00I6rThgiTrik+xvm/nqDqF6CjwpYA8V5nAglU?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?HSjtA+wrShKiKZmrycMq0bWm6ACO9IdQnk3n76v9hjgil1/OFjoVhQOoywke?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6sdLic2OGEfTLQuU95/o+k9a7EZTp3TQ3lYDVFnCaehCoktI6YozoCv7kU91?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?S5Y9l3xJMkCas60xBOaqvRgkJDWlTloOxiSwNtdIu3NiQCnXuxH5WtuC+ZLb?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?b6bcZx7hw8Qc4cB9tKcv1ROR0lP5C8BHjAQ6gJ7Aumd5lspHpZ3uwvV1vV34?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ThajEc9kQNEATN55JNwToDLzC4gcoEXT2aY9D9vbHClOJz6+gVHUtEidwEqd?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?88xDsRb5tnROJfC2oadFhg9C0fylCTPK3K4tLt41lxU4Y8qHHNE6nYthTeDm?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?5T2nHlh3UPzpiTYUgvchHRy93sQpDCob86EqxgocLVDc+pAhLiWejPsMwmYX?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?hKG0EPONhPIClYf833h+LkMtWhUSFrBkQz5BxnhOyQsK1o6YxrXTQKZpp6Ck?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?+CV8dxYKG9N7EkxlHSBbPNj1sGvIn1tvl7Xzoao+L9BWlVmuHFpYDDyhQkBE?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?7b/rvoyNHUTYvSzqLHzGxf6FhtDJcBkVmBFqxOzv2sQ5v/azm3M+mW6PMVCj?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?jXCakPj6INkEh0/MUQU45jWGOkUyncIICm1zs19aPvp8BNIijPvoFmLhfe/+?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?OuESe4bOWwqGc4dLbEJPBgXClNin9J0ZzUD0C98ppcMZYD4hmOnRKnDPvGJa?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?C/phT6DAbVI/amOqHp83xORgh3/ROApUr/jfPMtMFrfYFPtN8Cxz3WkrSQfo?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?4TDYPfizyEhhfhltNxQyjobBgN7X6ihePstqOTy1E6HWuXdCTk0m9DjPD6h+?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?nEiHkfm+bJWQDuzyiAejYPXPIrDzdHaULOrjdMmPFFnuxNMMmke64bzGpeAb?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?/9ZxNCStisMrPzVDTOxb5mzgHUaKw7xUZzFnVo68NPCw5saTHVmSgAivcpsM?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?yDw8z2JXZ+vcfn6ch0TcFipc4dY9qh2Afj2wbQDutPTKq2QvLCRFPR3EHR1J?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?BQN6nHN9ChDchq1QUXylhuckx8Ae5nBsc9Pm+IC3PxIlu39h6/LoE+nHTL5s?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?8fwx+NPos0whBGKZTt4O6Wg/S2PnXWOncsGFriQLkUvYlkym533YR9Yhfxsg?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?/Sk3QLMqnzLDxOeiJQrwqm4r+oX10TWwAaRXi+UBN6iXtx61EIbl99dCRU8Z?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Glhz3I65cRBu0Sz+/CCvGO0d598oFmS63imbP2HnFAESxttQPAou/WRfbLKc?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?D1XAd+MRuLYY1+qsBZJj8Uu/MktcGln1Ap7Re3VFJ3nOwCNEDU67tKy8jSy9?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?gzkUkiSpc5O9g4QTgolgFSDfRegxwvD4myLrvykSttPI6+dDlnfyH7aAYvd2?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ukM9aNpVVCtJqkklWfsirSGmss2pmt1RfIl9m9hbYXO/h3JfLiN4PEpX6Cq2?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?08cF9nnebTauiSRrKglHlm7t/tMu94v13trnim15xqyV?=
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 55be26f8-e628-481e-7187-08dc10bb3108
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: SA1PR11MB6733.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2024 02:32:14.9478
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: nLBMafwQUWRAg8DvpiUI1efEakISf/KSIZR7IVNu9kwOlHN95fRsJu3JPiM0uQLHnVp0A9KLJYbCOfvIOc16Sg==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CH0PR11MB8216
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com

Dan Williams wrote:
> Smita Koralahalli wrote:
> > On 1/8/2024 8:58 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 16:17:27 -0800
> > > Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > >> Series status/background
> > >> ========================
> > >>
> > >> Smita has been a great help with this series.  Thank you again!
> > >>
> > >> Smita's testing found that the GHES code ended up printing the events
> > >> twice.  This version avoids the duplicate print by calling the callback
> > >> from the GHES code instead of the EFI code as suggested by Dan.
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure this is working as intended.
> > > 
> > > There is nothing gating the call in ghes_proc() of ghes_print_estatus()
> > > and now the EFI code handling that pretty printed things is missing we get
> > > the horrible kernel logging for an unknown block instead.
> > > 
> > > So I think we need some minimal code in cper.c to match the guids then not
> > > log them (on basis we are arguing there is no need for new cper records).
> > > Otherwise we are in for some messy kernel logs
> > > 
> > > Something like:
> > > 
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]: Hardware error from APEI Generic Hardware Error Source: 1
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]: event severity: recoverable
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:  Error 0, type: recoverable
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   section type: unknown, fbcd0a77-c260-417f-85a9-088b1621eba6
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   section length: 0x90
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000000: 00000090 00000007 00000000 0d938086  ................
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000010: 00100000 00000000 00040000 00000000  ................
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000020: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000  ................
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000030: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000  ................
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000040: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000  ................
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000050: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000  ................
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000060: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000  ................
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000070: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000  ................
> > > {1}[Hardware Error]:   00000080: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000  ................
> > > cxl_general_media: memdev=mem1 host=0000:10:00.0 serial=4 log=Informational : time=0 uuid=fbcd0a77-c260-417f-85a9-088b1621eba6 len=0 flags='' handle=0 related_handle=0 maint_op_class=0 : dpa=0 dpa_flags='' descriptor='' type='ECC Error' transaction_type='Unknown' channel=0 rank=0 device=0 comp_id=00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 validity_flags=''
> > > 
> > > (I'm filling the record with 0s currently)
> > 
> > Yeah, when I tested this, I thought its okay for the hexdump to be there 
> > in dmesg from EFI as the handling is done in trace events from GHES.
> > 
> > If, we need to handle from EFI, then it would be a good reason to move 
> > the GUIDs out from GHES and place it in a common location for EFI/cper 
> > to share similar to protocol errors.
> 
> Ah, yes, my expectation was more aligned with Jonathan's observation to
> do the processing in GHES code *and* skip the processing in the CPER
> code, something like:
> 

Agreed this was intended I did not realize the above.

> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
> index 35c37f667781..0a4eed470750 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
>  #include <linux/bcd.h>
>  #include <acpi/ghes.h>
>  #include <ras/ras_event.h>
> +#include <linux/cxl-event.h>
>  #include "cper_cxl.h"
>  
>  /*
> @@ -607,6 +608,15 @@ cper_estatus_print_section(const char *pfx, struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata
>  			cper_print_prot_err(newpfx, prot_err);
>  		else
>  			goto err_section_too_small;
> +	} else if (guid_equal(sec_type, &CPER_SEC_CXL_GEN_MEDIA_GUID)) {
> +		printk("%ssection_type: CXL General Media Error\n", newpfx);

Do we want the printk's here?  I did not realize that a generic event
would be printed.  So intention was nothing would be done on this path.

Ira