linux-kernel - Re: [RFC V2 PATCH 06/11] cxl/mem: Trace DRAM Event Record

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: <20221011144712.00004a05@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 11 Oct 2022 14:47:12 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To:     <ira.weiny@...el.com>
CC:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        "Ben Widawsky" <bwidawsk@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC V2 PATCH 06/11] cxl/mem: Trace DRAM Event Record

On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 15:41:26 -0700
ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:

> From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> 
> CXL rev 3.0 section 8.2.9.2.1.2 defines the DRAM Event Record.
> 
> Determine if the event read is a DRAM event record and if so trace the
> record.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> 

Trivial comments inline

Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>

> diff --git a/include/trace/events/cxl.h b/include/trace/events/cxl.h
> index 82a8d3b750a2..7a90cfea348b 100644
> --- a/include/trace/events/cxl.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/cxl.h
> @@ -230,6 +230,100 @@ TRACE_EVENT(general_media,
>  		)
>  );
>  

> +
> +TRACE_EVENT(dram,
> +
> +	TP_PROTO(const char *dev_name, enum cxl_event_log_type log,
> +		 struct cxl_event_dram *rec),
> +
> +	TP_ARGS(dev_name, log, rec),
> +
> +	TP_STRUCT__entry(
> +		CXL_EVT_TP_entry
> +		/* DRAM */
> +		__field(u64, phys_addr)
> +		__field(u8, descriptor)
> +		__field(u8, type)
> +		__field(u8, transaction_type)
> +		__field(u8, channel)
> +		__field(u16, validity_flags)
> +		__field(u16, column)	/* Out of order to pack trace record */
> +		__field(u32, nibble_mask)
> +		__field(u32, row)
> +		__array(u8, cor_mask, CXL_EVENT_DER_CORRECTION_MASK_SIZE)
> +		__array(u8, reserved, CXL_EVENT_DER_RES_SIZE)

If we are going to have this, why not put it at the end?  Will that affect the
packing badly?

> +		__field(u8, rank)	/* Out of order to pack trace record */
> +		__field(u8, bank_group)	/* Out of order to pack trace record */
> +		__field(u8, bank)	/* Out of order to pack trace record */
> +	),
> +
> +	TP_fast_assign(
> +		CXL_EVT_TP_fast_assign(dev_name, log, rec->hdr);
> +
> +		/* DRAM */
> +		__entry->phys_addr = le64_to_cpu(rec->phys_addr);
> +		__entry->descriptor = rec->descriptor;
> +		__entry->type = rec->type;
> +		__entry->transaction_type = rec->transaction_type;
> +		__entry->validity_flags = get_unaligned_le16(rec->validity_flags);
> +		__entry->channel = rec->channel;
> +		__entry->rank = rec->rank;
> +		__entry->nibble_mask = get_unaligned_le24(rec->nibble_mask);
> +		__entry->bank_group = rec->bank_group;
> +		__entry->bank = rec->bank;
> +		__entry->row = get_unaligned_le24(rec->row);
> +		__entry->column = get_unaligned_le16(rec->column);
> +		memcpy(__entry->cor_mask, &rec->correction_mask,
> +			CXL_EVENT_DER_CORRECTION_MASK_SIZE);
> +		memcpy(__entry->reserved, &rec->reserved,
> +			CXL_EVENT_DER_RES_SIZE);
> +	),
> +
> +	CXL_EVT_TP_printk("phys_addr=%llx volatile=%s desc='%s' type='%s' " \
> +		"trans_type='%s' channel=%u rank=%u nibble_mask=%x " \
> +		"bank_group=%u bank=%u row=%u column=%u cor_mask=%s " \
> +		"valid_flags='%s' reserved=%s",
> +		__entry->phys_addr & CXL_GMER_PHYS_ADDR_MASK,
> +		(__entry->phys_addr & CXL_GMER_PHYS_ADDR_VOLATILE) ? "TRUE" : "FALSE",
> +		show_event_desc_flags(__entry->descriptor),
> +		show_mem_event_type(__entry->type),
> +		show_trans_type(__entry->transaction_type),
> +		__entry->channel, __entry->rank, __entry->nibble_mask,
> +		__entry->bank_group, __entry->bank,
> +		__entry->row, __entry->column,
> +		__print_hex(__entry->cor_mask, CXL_EVENT_DER_CORRECTION_MASK_SIZE),
> +		show_dram_valid_flags(__entry->validity_flags),
> +		__print_hex(__entry->reserved, CXL_EVENT_DER_RES_SIZE)
> +		)
Probably one less tab on that trailing )?

> +);
> +
>  #endif /* _CXL_TRACE_EVENTS_H */
>  
>  /* This part must be outside protection */