[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9d4b10fa-dcd8-8071-e68b-24536b24e780@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 13:49:04 -0500
From: "Alex G." <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, alex_gagniuc@...lteam.com,
austin_bolen@...l.com, shyam_iyer@...l.com,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Shiju Jose <shiju.jose@...wei.com>,
"Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang" <zjzhang@...eaurora.org>,
Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu@...wei.com>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] acpi: apei: Rename ghes_severity() to
ghes_cper_severity()
On 05/22/2018 01:45 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 01:19:34PM -0500, Alex G. wrote:
>> Firmware started passing "fatal" GHES headers with the explicit intent of
>> crashing an OS. At the same time, we've learnt how to handle these errors in
>> a number of cases. With DPC (coming soon to firmware-first) the error is
>> contained, and a non-issue.
>
> Perhaps DPC is the change that you need to emphasize as to
> why things are different now, so we can change the default
> Linux behavior.
>
> With the h/w guaranteeing that corrupt data is contained, we
> should be safe to disregard BIOS indications of "fatal" problems
> that could be anything and might show up in unknown ways some
> time later if we keep running.
Sure. DPC is much harder to contest as a reason. However, the AER path
benefits as well from this change in behavior. I'm certain there are
other classes of errors that benefit as well from the change, though I
haven't had the time or the inclination to look for them.
Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists