linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND] PCI/AER: Use a common function to print AER error bits

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: <20180427224337.GC73256@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Apr 2018 17:43:37 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:     Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>
Cc:     bhelgaas@...gle.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, fred@...dlawl.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alex_gagniuc@...lteam.com,
        austin_bolen@...l.com, keith.busch@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] PCI/AER: Use a common function to print AER error
 bits

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:09:43PM -0500, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote:
> On errors reported from CPER, cper_print_bits() was used to log the
> AER bits. This resulted in hard-to-understand messages, without a
> prefix. Instead use __aer_print_error() for both native AER and CPER
> to provide a more consistent log format.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c | 16 +++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c
> index cfc89dd57831..cfae4d52f848 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c
> @@ -216,28 +216,30 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cper_severity_to_aer);
>  void cper_print_aer(struct pci_dev *dev, int aer_severity,
>  		    struct aer_capability_regs *aer)
>  {
> -	int layer, agent, status_strs_size, tlp_header_valid = 0;
> +	int layer, agent, tlp_header_valid = 0;
>  	u32 status, mask;
> -	const char **status_strs;
> +	struct aer_err_info info;
>  
>  	if (aer_severity == AER_CORRECTABLE) {
>  		status = aer->cor_status;
>  		mask = aer->cor_mask;
> -		status_strs = aer_correctable_error_string;
> -		status_strs_size = ARRAY_SIZE(aer_correctable_error_string);
>  	} else {
>  		status = aer->uncor_status;
>  		mask = aer->uncor_mask;
> -		status_strs = aer_uncorrectable_error_string;
> -		status_strs_size = ARRAY_SIZE(aer_uncorrectable_error_string);
>  		tlp_header_valid = status & AER_LOG_TLP_MASKS;
>  	}
>  
>  	layer = AER_GET_LAYER_ERROR(aer_severity, status);
>  	agent = AER_GET_AGENT(aer_severity, status);
>  
> +	memset(&info, 0, sizeof(info));
> +	info.severity = aer_severity;
> +	info.status = status;
> +	info.mask = mask;
> +	info.first_error = 0x1f;

I like this patch a lot, but where does this "first_error = 0x1f" come
from?

I assume this is supposed to be the "First Error Pointer" in the
Advanced Error Capabilities and Control register (PCIe r4.0, sec
7.8.4.7).  There is a "cap_control" field in struct
aer_capability_regs; should we be using that here?

> +
>  	pci_err(dev, "aer_status: 0x%08x, aer_mask: 0x%08x\n", status, mask);
> -	cper_print_bits("", status, status_strs, status_strs_size);
> +	__aer_print_error(dev, &info);
>  	pci_err(dev, "aer_layer=%s, aer_agent=%s\n",
>  		aer_error_layer[layer], aer_agent_string[agent]);
>  
> -- 
> 2.14.3
>