| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20151019201457.GA30135@pd.tnic>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 22:14:57 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Brijesh Singh <brijeshkumar.singh@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
robh+dt@...nel.org, pawel.moll@....com, mark.rutland@....com,
ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk, galak@...eaurora.org,
dougthompson@...ssion.com, mchehab@....samsung.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC: Add AMD Seattle SoC EDAC
+ Arnd for the DT bindings.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 02:23:17PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> Add support for the AMD Seattle SoC EDAC driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh <brijeshkumar.singh@....com>
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/edac/amd-seattle-edac.txt | 15 +
> drivers/edac/Kconfig | 6 +
> drivers/edac/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/edac/seattle_edac.c | 306 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 328 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/amd-seattle-edac.txt
> create mode 100644 drivers/edac/seattle_edac.c
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/amd-seattle-edac.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/amd-seattle-edac.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..a0354e8
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/amd-seattle-edac.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
> +* AMD Seattle SoC EDAC node
> +
> +EDAC node is defined to describe on-chip error detection and reporting.
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible: Should be "amd,arm-seattle-edac"
> +- poll-delay-msec: Indicates how often the edac check callback should be called.
> + Time in msec.
> +
> +Example:
> + edac {
> + compatible = "amd,arm-seattle-edac";
> + poll-delay-msec = <100>;
> + };
> +
> diff --git a/drivers/edac/Kconfig b/drivers/edac/Kconfig
> index ef25000..d342335 100644
> --- a/drivers/edac/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/edac/Kconfig
> @@ -390,4 +390,10 @@ config EDAC_XGENE
> Support for error detection and correction on the
> APM X-Gene family of SOCs.
>
> +config EDAC_SEATTLE
> + tristate "AMD Seattle EDAC"
> + depends on EDAC_MM_EDAC && ARCH_SEATTLE
> + help
> + Support for error detection and correction on the
> + AMD Seattle SOC.
> endif # EDAC
> diff --git a/drivers/edac/Makefile b/drivers/edac/Makefile
> index ae3c5f3..9e4f3ef 100644
> --- a/drivers/edac/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/edac/Makefile
> @@ -68,3 +68,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_OCTEON_PCI) += octeon_edac-pci.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_ALTERA_MC) += altera_edac.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_SYNOPSYS) += synopsys_edac.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_XGENE) += xgene_edac.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_SEATTLE) += seattle_edac.o
> diff --git a/drivers/edac/seattle_edac.c b/drivers/edac/seattle_edac.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..78101aa
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/edac/seattle_edac.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,306 @@
> +/*
> + * AMD Seattle EDAC
> + *
> + * Copyright (c) 2015, Advanced Micro Devices
> + * Author: Brijesh Singh <brijeshkumar.singh@....com>
> + *
> + * The driver polls CPUMERRSR_EL1 and L2MERRSR_EL1 registers to logs the
to log the ...
> + * non-fatal errors. Whereas the single bit and double bit ECC erros are
> + * handled by firmware.
"Single and double bit ECC errors are handled by firmware." - no need
"for Whereas".
Please run this through a spell checker before your next submission.
Question about the content itself: non-fatal errors are polled but
single and double-bit errors are handled by fw. Single bit errors are
non-fatal, methinks. So what is this sentence actually saying?
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> + * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
> + * Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your
> + * option) any later version.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> + *
> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> + * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
Can you get rid of that copyright boilerplate and use a single sentence like:
"Licensed under GPL v2."
Ask your legal people and/or your manager - they should know.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +
> +#include "edac_core.h"
> +
> +#define EDAC_MOD_STR "seattle_edac"
> +
> +#define CPUMERRSR_EL1_INDEX(x) ((x) & 0x1ffff)
> +#define CPUMERRSR_EL1_BANK(x) (((x) >> 18) & 0x1f)
> +#define CPUMERRSR_EL1_RAMID(x) (((x) >> 24) & 0x7f)
> +#define CPUMERRSR_EL1_VALID(x) ((x) & (1 << 31))
> +#define CPUMERRSR_EL1_REPEAT(x) (((x) >> 32) & 0x7f)
> +#define CPUMERRSR_EL1_OTHER(x) (((x) >> 40) & 0xff)
> +#define CPUMERRSR_EL1_FATAL(x) ((x) & (1UL << 63))
> +
> +#define L2MERRSR_EL1_INDEX(x) ((x) & 0x1ffff)
> +#define L2MERRSR_EL1_CPUID(x) (((x) >> 18) & 0xf)
> +#define L2MERRSR_EL1_RAMID(x) (((x) >> 24) & 0x7f)
> +#define L2MERRSR_EL1_VALID(x) ((x) & (1 << 31))
> +#define L2MERRSR_EL1_REPEAT(x) (((x) >> 32) & 0xff)
> +#define L2MERRSR_EL1_OTHER(x) (((x) >> 40) & 0xff)
> +#define L2MERRSR_EL1_FATAL(x) ((x) & (1UL << 63))
> +
> +struct seattle_edac {
> + struct edac_device_ctl_info *edac_ctl;
> +};
> +
> +static inline u64 read_cpumerrsr_el1(void)
> +{
> + u64 val;
> +
> + asm volatile("mrs %0, s3_1_c15_c2_2" : "=r" (val));
> + return val;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void write_cpumerrsr_el1(u64 val)
> +{
> + asm volatile("msr s3_1_c15_c2_2, %0" :: "r" (val));
> +}
> +
> +static inline u64 read_l2merrsr_el1(void)
> +{
> + u64 val;
> +
> + asm volatile("mrs %0, s3_1_c15_c2_3" : "=r" (val));
> + return val;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void write_l2merrsr_el1(u64 val)
> +{
> + asm volatile("msr s3_1_c15_c2_3, %0" :: "r" (val));
> +}
> +
> +static void check_l2merrsr_el1_error(struct edac_device_ctl_info *edac_ctl)
> +{
All those function names are very cryptic. Can you make them more
human-readable and -understandable? Don't be afraid to use comments too.
> + int fatal;
> + int cpuid;
> + u64 val = read_l2merrsr_el1();
> +
> + if (!L2MERRSR_EL1_VALID(val))
> + return;
> +
> + fatal = L2MERRSR_EL1_FATAL(val);
> + cpuid = L2MERRSR_EL1_CPUID(val);
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "CPU%d detected %s error on L2 (L2MERRSR=%#llx)!\n",
"CPU%d detected %s L2 error ..."
> + smp_processor_id(), fatal ? "fatal" : "non-fatal", val);
> +
> + switch (L2MERRSR_EL1_RAMID(val)) {
> + case 0x10:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L2 Tag RAM cpu %d way %d\n", cpuid / 2, cpuid % 2);
What is a "L2 Tag RAM cpu <num> way <num>"? Can you make those more
humanly understandable please. Like
" Error in the L2 Tag array.\n"
Also, you're dumping smp_processor_id() above and here you have cpuid
/ 2 (btw, I'm guessing you wanna do "cpuid >> 1" for the division and
"cpuid & 1" for the modulo for additional speed since division is
costly) and you're calling this "cpu" too. What is that "cpu" supposed
to mean?
Ditto for the remaining printk messages below.
> + break;
> + case 0x11:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L2 Data RAM cpu %d way %d\n", cpuid / 2, cpuid % 2);
> + break;
> + case 0x12:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L2 Snoop tag RAM cpu %d way %d\n",
> + cpuid / 2, cpuid % 2);
> + break;
> + case 0x14:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L2 Dirty RAM cpu %d way %d\n",
> + cpuid / 2, cpuid % 2);
> + break;
> + case 0x18:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L2 inclusion RAM cpu %d way %d\n",
> + cpuid / 2, cpuid % 2);
> + break;
> + default:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "unknown RAMID cpuid %d\n", cpuid);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR, "Repeated error count: %d\n",
> + (int)L2MERRSR_EL1_REPEAT(val));
Why the cast? You can simply print %lu.
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR, "Other error count: %d\n",
> + (int)L2MERRSR_EL1_OTHER(val));
Ditto.
> + if (fatal)
> + edac_device_handle_ue(edac_ctl, smp_processor_id(), 1,
> + edac_ctl->name);
> + else
> + edac_device_handle_ce(edac_ctl, smp_processor_id(), 1,
> + edac_ctl->name);
> + write_l2merrsr_el1(0);
> +}
> +
> +static void check_cpumerrsr_el1_error(struct edac_device_ctl_info *edac_ctl)
> +{
Also a cryptic name.
> + int fatal;
> + int bank;
> + u64 val = read_cpumerrsr_el1();
> +
> + if (!CPUMERRSR_EL1_VALID(val))
> + return;
> +
> + bank = CPUMERRSR_EL1_BANK(val);
> + fatal = CPUMERRSR_EL1_FATAL(val);
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "CPU%d detected %s error on L1 (CPUMERRSR=%#llx)!\n",
As above.
> + smp_processor_id(), fatal ? "fatal" : "non-fatal", val);
> +
> + switch (CPUMERRSR_EL1_RAMID(val)) {
> + case 0x0:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L1-I Tag RAM bank %d\n", bank);
> + break;
> + case 0x1:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L1-I Data RAM bank %d\n", bank);
> + break;
> + case 0x8:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L1-D Tag RAM bank %d\n", bank);
> + break;
> + case 0x9:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L1-D Data RAM bank %d\n", bank);
> + break;
> + case 0x18:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "L2 TLB RAM bank %d\n", bank);
Are those to say *where* the errors were? If so, please say so in the
error message:
"CPU%d: L1 %s error detected in the L1-I tag RAM bank"
you can use pr_cont() for the continuation messages.
> + break;
> + default:
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "unknown ramid %d bank %d\n",
> + (int)CPUMERRSR_EL1_RAMID(val), bank);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR, "Repeated error count: %d\n",
> + (int)CPUMERRSR_EL1_REPEAT(val));
> + edac_printk(KERN_CRIT, EDAC_MOD_STR, "Other error count: %d\n",
> + (int)CPUMERRSR_EL1_OTHER(val));
No need to cast.
> + if (fatal)
> + edac_device_handle_ue(edac_ctl, smp_processor_id(), 1,
> + edac_ctl->name);
> + else
> + edac_device_handle_ce(edac_ctl, smp_processor_id(), 1,
> + edac_ctl->name);
> + write_cpumerrsr_el1(0);
> +}
> +
> +static void cpu_check_errors(void *args)
> +{
> + struct edac_device_ctl_info *edev_ctl = args;
> +
> + check_cpumerrsr_el1_error(edev_ctl);
> + check_l2merrsr_el1_error(edev_ctl);
> +}
> +
> +static void edac_check_errors(struct edac_device_ctl_info *edev_ctl)
> +{
> + int cpu;
> +
> + /* read L1 and L2 memory error syndrome register on possible CPU's */
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
This is not cpu hotplug-safe. What if I offline a CPU while this loop
runs?
> + smp_call_function_single(cpu, cpu_check_errors, edev_ctl, 0);
Hint:
get_online_cpus();
on_each_cpu();
put_online_cpus();
> +}
> +
> +static int seattle_edac_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + int rc;
> + u32 poll_msec;
> + struct seattle_edac *drv;
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> +
> + rc = of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "poll-delay-msec",
> + &poll_msec);
> + if (rc < 0) {
> + edac_printk(KERN_ERR, EDAC_MOD_STR,
> + "failed to get poll interval\n");
> + return rc;
> + }
> +
> + drv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*drv), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!drv)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + drv->edac_ctl = edac_device_alloc_ctl_info(0, "cpu",
> + num_possible_cpus(), "L", 2,
Same problematic if someone offlines a core and then loads this module.
> + 1, NULL, 0,
> + edac_device_alloc_index());
Why aren't you checking the return value of this function?
> + drv->edac_ctl->poll_msec = poll_msec;
> + drv->edac_ctl->edac_check = edac_check_errors;
> + drv->edac_ctl->dev = dev;
> + drv->edac_ctl->mod_name = dev_name(dev);
> + drv->edac_ctl->dev_name = dev_name(dev);
> + drv->edac_ctl->ctl_name = "cpu_err";
> + drv->edac_ctl->panic_on_ue = 1;
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, drv);
> +
> + rc = edac_device_add_device(drv->edac_ctl);
> + if (rc)
> + goto edac_alloc_failed;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +edac_alloc_failed:
> + edac_device_free_ctl_info(drv->edac_ctl);
> + return rc;
> +}
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists