Re: [PATCH V17 00/11] Add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI 6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64
On 21.06.17 15:00:25, Robert Richter wrote: > On 20.06.17 09:49:32, Will Deacon wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 08:34:39AM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > > > On 07.06.17 12:50:12, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks, I've pushed this out as: > > > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git > > > > for-next/ras-apei > > > > > > > > which I'll merge into for-next/core (and therefore linux-next) either > > > > the > > > > end of this week or the beginning of next week. Please take a look if > > > > you > > > > get a chance. > > > > > > any reason why there was a roll back of for-next/core? > > > > > > + 0870f692c2ed...e27c7fa015d6 for-next/core -> arm64/for-next/core > > > (forced update) > > > > > > Is it because for-next/ras-apei goes through tip? > > > > No, it's because the RAS stuff ran into horrible conflicts with the UUID > > tree: > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/6/16/22 > > > > Tyler should be rebasing that soon, so hopefully I can requeue that stuff > > this week. > > Note there are also conflicts with tip-ras from Borsis' tree. Turned out this is actually the ras/core branch from tip tree, esp. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?id=7bf130e4a065 -Robert ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
Re: [PATCH V17 00/11] Add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI 6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64
On 20.06.17 09:49:32, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi Robert, > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 08:34:39AM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > > On 07.06.17 12:50:12, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > Thanks, I've pushed this out as: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git > > > for-next/ras-apei > > > > > > which I'll merge into for-next/core (and therefore linux-next) either the > > > end of this week or the beginning of next week. Please take a look if you > > > get a chance. > > > > any reason why there was a roll back of for-next/core? > > > > + 0870f692c2ed...e27c7fa015d6 for-next/core -> arm64/for-next/core > > (forced update) > > > > Is it because for-next/ras-apei goes through tip? > > No, it's because the RAS stuff ran into horrible conflicts with the UUID > tree: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/6/16/22 > > Tyler should be rebasing that soon, so hopefully I can requeue that stuff > this week. Note there are also conflicts with tip-ras from Borsis' tree. -Robert ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
Re: [PATCH V17 00/11] Add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI 6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64
Hi Robert, On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 08:34:39AM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > On 07.06.17 12:50:12, Will Deacon wrote: > > > Thanks, I've pushed this out as: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git > > for-next/ras-apei > > > > which I'll merge into for-next/core (and therefore linux-next) either the > > end of this week or the beginning of next week. Please take a look if you > > get a chance. > > any reason why there was a roll back of for-next/core? > > + 0870f692c2ed...e27c7fa015d6 for-next/core -> arm64/for-next/core (forced > update) > > Is it because for-next/ras-apei goes through tip? No, it's because the RAS stuff ran into horrible conflicts with the UUID tree: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/6/16/22 Tyler should be rebasing that soon, so hopefully I can requeue that stuff this week. Will ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
Re: [PATCH V17 00/11] Add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI 6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64
Will, On 07.06.17 12:50:12, Will Deacon wrote: > Thanks, I've pushed this out as: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git > for-next/ras-apei > > which I'll merge into for-next/core (and therefore linux-next) either the > end of this week or the beginning of next week. Please take a look if you > get a chance. any reason why there was a roll back of for-next/core? + 0870f692c2ed...e27c7fa015d6 for-next/core -> arm64/for-next/core (forced update) Is it because for-next/ras-apei goes through tip? Thanks, -Robert ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
Re: [PATCH V17 00/11] Add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI 6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 02:32:02PM -0600, Tyler Baicar wrote: > When a memory error, CPU error, PCIe error, or other type of hardware error > that's covered by RAS occurs, firmware should populate the shared GHES memory > location with the proper GHES structures to notify the OS of the error. > For example, platforms that implement firmware first handling may implement > separate GHES sources for corrected errors and uncorrected errors. If the > error is an uncorrectable error, then the firmware will notify the OS > immediately since the error needs to be handled ASAP. The OS will then be able > to take the appropriate action needed such as offlining a page. If the error > is a corrected error, then the firmware will not interrupt the OS immediately. > Instead, the OS will see and report the error the next time it's GHES timer > expires. The kernel will first parse the GHES structures and report the errors > through the kernel logs and then notify the user space through RAS trace > events. This allows user space applications such as RAS Daemon to see the > errors and report them however the user desires. This patchset extends the > kernel functionality for RAS errors based on updates in the UEFI 2.6 and > ACPI 6.1 specifications. Thanks, I've pushed this out as: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git for-next/ras-apei which I'll merge into for-next/core (and therefore linux-next) either the end of this week or the beginning of next week. Please take a look if you get a chance. Will ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
Re: [PATCH V17 00/11] Add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI 6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 02:32:02PM -0600, Tyler Baicar wrote: > When a memory error, CPU error, PCIe error, or other type of hardware error > that's covered by RAS occurs, firmware should populate the shared GHES memory > location with the proper GHES structures to notify the OS of the error. ... > V17:Rebase on tip > Change trace event helper function names > Remove unneeded prefixes from commit text The whole series: Reviewed-by: Borislav PetkovThanks! -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. -- ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm