linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cxl/acpi: Warn on unsupported platform config detection

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: <667cbbe3139b7_4fe7f294b5@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 18:09:55 -0700
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fabio.m.de.francesco@...ux.intel.com>, "Alison
 Schofield" <alison.schofield@...el.com>, Dan Williams
	<dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, Jonathan Cameron
	<jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, "Vishal
 Verma" <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>, "Dan
 Williams" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cxl/acpi: Warn on unsupported platform config detection

Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 26, 2024 2:45:14 AM GMT+2 Dan Williams wrote:
> > Alison Schofield wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 02:59:41PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > 
> > > Fabio,
> > > 
> > > cxl/acpi does a lot of platform config work. "...unsupported platform
> > > config detection" gives no hint that this is about CHBS's or an eRCD.
> > > Please offer something more specific. Thanks.
> > 
> > The message specifies "mixed Virtual Host and Restricted CXL Host
> > hierarchy" as the conflict. The relationship between RCH and eRCDs is an
> > exercise for the reader, and CHBS is an ACPI detail that really should
> > not be emitted in an error message. So I am struggling to imagine what a
> > more specific error message would be without paragraphs of backstory.
> > 
> > All that is needed here is just enough words for when someone posts a
> > problem to the list that someone savvy can go "ah, you fell into this
> > specification hole where CXL 2.0 root port registers are difficult to
> > associate with an RCH config, thanks for the report now we know that
> > Linux needs to worry about this case".
> > 
> I think that Alison raised a good point.
> 
> If you have nothing against it, I'll change the subject line to: "cxl/acpi: 
> Warn on mixed VH and eRCH hierarchies"
> 
> How about that change?

Just, s/eRCH/RCH/, but other than that looks fine to me.

However, I thought this comment was about the error message not the patch subject.