linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI: APEI: EINJ: EINJV2 support added

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: <4376a7ba-2f85-6160-b7d4-d5c08b5b3429@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 May 2023 18:05:48 +0200
From:   "Wilczynski, Michal" <michal.wilczynski@...el.com>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Piyush Malgujar <pmalgujar@...vell.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com" <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        "benjamin.cheatham@....com" <benjamin.cheatham@....com>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>,
        "lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
        "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "jannadurai@...vell.com" <jannadurai@...vell.com>,
        "cchavva@...vell.com" <cchavva@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI: APEI: EINJ: EINJV2 support added



On 5/9/2023 8:35 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
>> If a platform supports einj v2, then the einj directory wont be needed, as per spec,
>> if a non-zero Error Type value is set by EINJV2_SET_ERROR_TYPE, then any Error Type
>> value set by (einj case) SET_ERROR_TYPE_WITH_ADDRESS and/or SET_ERROR_TYPE will be
>> ignored. So based on einjv2 is supported or not, we can have either einjv2 or einj 
>> directory with the related params files in it respectively. 
>> Kindly let us know your thoughts.
> Piyush,
>
> There are a lot of validation tests built on top of the EINJ v1 Linux interface and interest
> in keeping them working rather than forcing a giant "change everything" when the first
> EINJ V2 system arrives.
>
> BIOS team here thinks that the EINJ V2 spec change is (or can be) incremental.
> Platform firmware can choose to continue supporting EINJ V1 while also providing
> EINJ V2 actions.
>
> So Linux should be prepared to handle:
>
> 1) Legacy systems with just the V1 interface.
>
> 2) Incremental systems that have both V1 and V2 interfaces.
>
> 3) Future looking systems that only have the V2 interface.
>
> -Tony

Hi all,

It seems to me like backwards compatibility has been a big priority historically for Linux.
I guess with debugfs we get more leeway to change things, however this interface seems
to be present for a very long time and seems to be entrenched enough to keep backwards
compatibility.


Piyush,
Did you make any progress on the solution ? I can offer some help if you don't have BW to work
on this.


Good video on the topic :)
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nn-SGblUhi4&ab_channel=FelipeContreras

>
>