linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] acpi/ghes, efi/cper: Recognize and process CXL Protocol Errors.

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6595e076cac24_3ec8294fb@iweiny-mobl.notmuch>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 14:32:22 -0800
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To: Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@....com>, Ira Weiny
	<ira.weiny@...el.com>, <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Alison Schofield
	<alison.schofield@...el.com>, Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, "Dan
 Williams" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Jonathan Cameron
	<Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] acpi/ghes, efi/cper: Recognize and process CXL
 Protocol Errors.

Smita Koralahalli wrote:
> On 1/2/2024 9:58 AM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > Smita Koralahalli wrote:

[snip]

> >> +
> >> +	return 0;
> >> +}
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/cxl-event.h b/include/linux/cxl-event.h
> >> index 90d8390a73cb..7ba2dfd6619e 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/cxl-event.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/cxl-event.h
> >> @@ -154,11 +154,17 @@ struct cxl_ras_capability_regs {
> >>   
> >>   struct cxl_cper_rec_data {
> >>   	struct cxl_cper_event_rec rec;
> >> +	struct cxl_ras_capability_regs *cxl_ras;
> >> +	int severity;
> > 
> > NIT: When I saw this without any addition to event type I wondered if the
> > series would bisect.  I see it does because the record is not sent until
> > the next patch.  But I wonder if the 2 patches would be best reversed.
> 
> You mean to say patch 4 to be 3 and 3 to be 4?
> 
> And since I haven't used severity yet,  fix it by declaring severity to 
> where it is used..

Yes.  What you have is not technically wrong but it threw me in review.

> 
> > 
> > Also, should cxl_ras + severity be put in a protocol error sub-struct?
> > Does severity ever apply to event records?
> 
> No, not in any of the component event records. Only place is in "Event 
> Record Flags" in Common Event Record Format (Table 8-42).
> 
> Addressed in patch 1 to make a sub-struct.

Thanks!
Ira