linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 1/6] ACPI: add APEI/HEST/CPER structures and macros

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <59A0C813.2060201@huawei.com>
Date:   Sat, 26 Aug 2017 09:00:03 +0800
From:   Shannon Zhao <zhaoshenglong@...wei.com>
To:     gengdongjiu <gengdongjiu@...wei.com>, <lersek@...hat.com>,
        <mst@...hat.com>, <imammedo@...hat.com>,
        <peter.maydell@...aro.org>, <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>, <qemu-arm@...gnu.org>,
        <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <edk2-devel@...ts.01.org>,
        <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>, <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        <will.deacon@....com>, <james.morse@....com>,
        <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>, <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        <mingo@...nel.org>, <bp@...e.de>, <shiju.jose@...wei.com>,
        <zjzhang@...eaurora.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, <devel@...ica.org>,
        <john.garry@...wei.com>, <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
        <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>, <huangdaode@...ilicon.com>,
        <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>
CC:     <huangshaoyu@...wei.com>, <wuquanming@...wei.com>,
        <linuxarm@...wei.com>, <zhengqiang10@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 1/6] ACPI: add APEI/HEST/CPER structures and macros



On 2017/8/25 18:37, gengdongjiu wrote:
>>> +
>>> >> +/* From the ACPI 6.1 spec, "18.3.2.9 Hardware Error Notification" */
>>> >> +
>> > It's better to refer to the first spec version of this structure and
>> > same with others you define.
>  do you mean which spec version? the definition is aligned with the linux kernel.
What I mean here is that it's better to refer to the ACPI spec version
which introduces Hardware Error Notification first time.

>> > 
>>> >> +enum AcpiHestNotifyType {
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_POLLED = 0,
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_EXTERNAL = 1,
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_LOCAL = 2,
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_SCI = 3,
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_NMI = 4,
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_CMCI = 5,  /* ACPI 5.0 */
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_MCE = 6,   /* ACPI 5.0 */
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_GPIO = 7,  /* ACPI 6.0 */
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_SEA = 8,   /* ACPI 6.1 */
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_SEI = 9,   /* ACPI 6.1 */
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_GSIV = 10, /* ACPI 6.1 */
>>> >> +    ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_RESERVED = 11  /* 11 and greater are reserved */
>> > In ACPI 6.2, 11 is for Software Delegated Exception, is this useful for
>> > your patchset?
>   it is usefull, for all the error source, I reserved the space for them.
> Because the space is allocated one time, is not dynamically allocated.
> so I use the ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_RESERVED to specify that there is 11 error source.
> 
I mean whether the new type Software Delegated Exception is useful for
RAS. If so, we could add this new type here.

Thanks,
-- 
Shannon