| 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: <CAJZ5v0hp49Jt6ZWMNUkEOmMST5eM60b8Nzz0wT4w1--zj-KPWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 13:55:33 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: tanxiaofei <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ACPI / APEI: fix the regression of synchronous
external aborts occur in user-mode
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 2:32 PM tanxiaofei <tanxiaofei@...wei.com> wrote:
>
> @James
> Hi James, please help to review this patch. Thank you very much. :)
James, Boris, any comments?
> On 2020/12/10 20:09, Xiaofei Tan wrote:
> > After the commit 8fcc4ae6faf8 ("arm64: acpi: Make apei_claim_sea()
> > synchronise with APEI's irq work") applied, do_sea() return directly
> > for user-mode if apei_claim_sea() handled any error record. Therefore,
> > each error record reported by the user-mode SEA must be effectively
> > processed in APEI GHES driver.
> >
> > Currently, GHES driver only processes Memory Error Section.(Ignore PCIe
> > Error Section, as it has nothing to do with SEA). It is not enough.
> > Because ARM Processor Error could also be used for SEA in some hardware
> > platforms, such as Kunpeng9xx series. We can't ask them to switch to
> > use Memory Error Section for two reasons:
> > 1)The server was delivered to customers, and it will introduce
> > compatibility issue.
> > 2)It make sense to use ARM Processor Error Section. Because either
> > cache or memory errors could generate SEA when consumed by a processor.
> >
> > Do memory failure handling for ARM Processor Error Section just like
> > for Memory Error Section.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>
> > ---
> > Changes since v4:
> > - 1. Change the patch name from " ACPI / APEI: do memory failure on the
> > physical address reported by ARM processor error section" to this
> > more proper one.
> > - 2. Add a comment in the code to tell why not filter out corrected
> > error in an uncorrected section.
> >
> > Changes since v3:
> > - Print unhandled error following James Morse's advice.
> >
> > Changes since v2:
> > - Updated commit log
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> > index fce7ade..0893968 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> > @@ -441,28 +441,35 @@ static void ghes_kick_task_work(struct callback_head *head)
> > gen_pool_free(ghes_estatus_pool, (unsigned long)estatus_node, node_len);
> > }
> >
> > -static bool ghes_handle_memory_failure(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata,
> > - int sev)
> > +static bool ghes_do_memory_failure(u64 physical_addr, int flags)
> > {
> > unsigned long pfn;
> > - int flags = -1;
> > - int sec_sev = ghes_severity(gdata->error_severity);
> > - struct cper_sec_mem_err *mem_err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
> >
> > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_MEMORY_FAILURE))
> > return false;
> >
> > - if (!(mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_PA))
> > - return false;
> > -
> > - pfn = mem_err->physical_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + pfn = PHYS_PFN(physical_addr);
> > if (!pfn_valid(pfn)) {
> > pr_warn_ratelimited(FW_WARN GHES_PFX
> > "Invalid address in generic error data: %#llx\n",
> > - mem_err->physical_addr);
> > + physical_addr);
> > return false;
> > }
> >
> > + memory_failure_queue(pfn, flags);
> > + return true;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static bool ghes_handle_memory_failure(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata,
> > + int sev)
> > +{
> > + int flags = -1;
> > + int sec_sev = ghes_severity(gdata->error_severity);
> > + struct cper_sec_mem_err *mem_err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
> > +
> > + if (!(mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_PA))
> > + return false;
> > +
> > /* iff following two events can be handled properly by now */
> > if (sec_sev == GHES_SEV_CORRECTED &&
> > (gdata->flags & CPER_SEC_ERROR_THRESHOLD_EXCEEDED))
> > @@ -470,14 +477,51 @@ static bool ghes_handle_memory_failure(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata,
> > if (sev == GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE && sec_sev == GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE)
> > flags = 0;
> >
> > - if (flags != -1) {
> > - memory_failure_queue(pfn, flags);
> > - return true;
> > - }
> > + if (flags != -1)
> > + return ghes_do_memory_failure(mem_err->physical_addr, flags);
> >
> > return false;
> > }
> >
> > +static bool ghes_handle_arm_hw_error(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata, int sev)
> > +{
> > + struct cper_sec_proc_arm *err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
> > + struct cper_arm_err_info *err_info;
> > + bool queued = false;
> > + int sec_sev, i;
> > +
> > + log_arm_hw_error(err);
> > +
> > + sec_sev = ghes_severity(gdata->error_severity);
> > + if (sev != GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE || sec_sev != GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE)
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + err_info = (struct cper_arm_err_info *) (err + 1);
> > + for (i = 0; i < err->err_info_num; i++, err_info++) {
> > + bool is_cache = (err_info->type == CPER_ARM_CACHE_ERROR);
> > + bool has_pa = (err_info->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_INFO_VALID_PHYSICAL_ADDR);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * The field (err_info->error_info & BIT(26)) is fixed to set to
> > + * 1 in some old firmware of HiSilicon Kunpeng920. We assume that
> > + * firmware won't mix corrected errors in an uncorrected section,
> > + * and don't filter out 'corrected' error here.
> > + */
> > + if (!is_cache || !has_pa) {
> > + pr_warn_ratelimited(FW_WARN GHES_PFX
> > + "Unhandled processor error type %s\n",
> > + err_info->type < ARRAY_SIZE(cper_proc_error_type_strs) ?
> > + cper_proc_error_type_strs[err_info->type] : "unknown error");
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (ghes_do_memory_failure(err_info->physical_fault_addr, 0))
> > + queued = true;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return queued;
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * PCIe AER errors need to be sent to the AER driver for reporting and
> > * recovery. The GHES severities map to the following AER severities and
> > @@ -605,9 +649,7 @@ static bool ghes_do_proc(struct ghes *ghes,
> > ghes_handle_aer(gdata);
> > }
> > else if (guid_equal(sec_type, &CPER_SEC_PROC_ARM)) {
> > - struct cper_sec_proc_arm *err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
> > -
> > - log_arm_hw_error(err);
> > + queued = ghes_handle_arm_hw_error(gdata, sev);
> > } else {
> > void *err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
> >
> >
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists