linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] EDAC, ghes: Enable per-layer error reporting for ARM

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]

Date:   Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:01:02 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>, james.morse@....com
Cc:     mchehab@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] EDAC, ghes: Enable per-layer error reporting for ARM

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 01:26:49PM -0400, Tyler Baicar wrote:
> Enable per-layer error reporting for ARM systems so that the error
> counters are incremented per-DIMM.
> 
> On ARM systems that use firmware first error handling it is understood
> that card=channel and module=DIMM on that channel. Populate that
> information and enable per layer error reporting for ARM systems so that
> the EDAC error counters are incremented based on DIMM number as per the
> SMBIOS table rather than just incrementing the noinfo counters on the
> memory controller.

I guess.

James?

> Signed-off-by: Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>
> ---
>  drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c b/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
> index 473aeec..e4c8b6e 100644
> --- a/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
> +++ b/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
> @@ -213,9 +213,18 @@ void ghes_edac_report_mem_error(int sev, struct cper_sec_mem_err *mem_err)
>  	strcpy(e->label, "unknown label");
>  	e->msg = pvt->msg;
>  	e->other_detail = pvt->other_detail;
> -	e->top_layer = -1;
> -	e->mid_layer = -1;
> -	e->low_layer = -1;

<----- newline here.

> +	if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64))
> +	    && (mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_CARD)
> +	    && (mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_MODULE)) {
> +		e->top_layer = mem_err->card;
> +		e->mid_layer = mem_err->module;
> +		e->low_layer = -1;
> +		e->enable_per_layer_report = true;
> +	} else {
> +		e->top_layer = -1;
> +		e->mid_layer = -1;
> +		e->low_layer = -1;
> +	}

ditto.

>  	*pvt->other_detail = '\0';
>  	*pvt->msg = '\0';
>  
> -- 

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--