[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251006133128.GCaOPEsFuhJI89YG8L@fat_crate.local>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2025 15:31:28 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Rong Zhang <i@...g.moe>
Cc: "Mario Limonciello (AMD) (kernel.org)" <superm1@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/CPU/AMD: Prevent reset reasons from being retained
among boots
On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 06:18:30PM +0800, Rong Zhang wrote:
> A user may feel confused: Two bits are set, but only one reason is
> reported. Hmm... Is there a hidden failure?
Why would you assume that 1 set bit == 1 failure reason?
> Unless the user has read the PPR, it's hard to realize BIT(11) is
> already set in the reset value. The debug message is here to help:
>
> Cleared system reset reasons [0x08000800 => 0x00000800]
> ^ ^ ^ ^
>
> Now the user realizes that BIT(11) has nothing to do with reboot
> reasons.
>
> This was literally the confusion I experienced. I had to take some time
> looking for an appropriate public PPR and reading the PPR before
> realizing this fact.
Please explain in detail what confusion you were experiencing so that we can
address it properly.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists