[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220603221247.5118-1-mkhalfella@purestorage.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2022 22:12:47 +0000
From: Mohamed Khalfella <mkhalfella@...estorage.com>
To: mkhalfella@...estorage.com
Cc: bhelgaas@...gle.com, ebadger@...estorage.com, helgaas@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, msaggi@...estorage.com,
oohall@...il.com, rajatja@...gle.com, ruscur@...sell.cc,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/AER: Iterate over error counters instead of error
Is there any chance for this to land in 5.19?
On 5/10/22 14:17, Mohamed Khalfella wrote:
> > Thanks for catching this; it definitely looks like a real issue! I
> > guess you're probably seeing junk in the sysfs files?
>
> That is correct. The initial report was seeing junk when reading sysfs
> files. As descibed, this is happening because we reading data past the
> end of the stats counters array.
>
>
> > I think maybe we should populate the currently NULL entries in the
> > string[] arrays and simplify the code here, e.g.,
> >
> > static const char *aer_correctable_error_string[] = {
> > "RxErr", /* Bit Position 0 */
> > "dev_cor_errs_bit[1]",
> > ...
> >
> > if (stats[i])
> > len += sysfs_emit_at(buf, len, "%s %llu\n", strings_array[i], stats[i]);
>
> Doing it this way will change the output format. In this case we will show
> stats only if their value is greater than zero. The current code shows all the
> stats those have names (regardless of their value) plus those have non-zero
> values.
>
> >> @@ -1342,6 +1342,11 @@ static int aer_probe(struct pcie_device *dev)
> >> struct device *device = &dev->device;
> >> struct pci_dev *port = dev->port;
> >>
> >> + BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(aer_correctable_error_string) <
> >> + AER_MAX_TYPEOF_COR_ERRS);
> >> + BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(aer_uncorrectable_error_string) <
> >> + AER_MAX_TYPEOF_UNCOR_ERRS);
> >
> > And make these check for "!=" instead of "<".
I am happy to remove these BUILD_BUG_ON() if you think it is a good
idea to do so.
>
> This will require unnecessarily extending stats arrays to have 32 entries
> in order to match names arrays. If you don't feel strogly about changing
> "<" to "!=", I prefer to keep the code as it is.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists