Re: [PATCH 06/11] ACPI / APEI: Make the fixmap_idx per-ghes to allow multiple in_nmi() users

Hey James, On 2/15/2018 1:56 PM, James Morse wrote: Arm64 has multiple NMI-like notifications, but GHES only has one in_nmi() path. The interactions between these multiple NMI-like notifications is, unclear. Split this single path up by moving the fixmap idx and lock into the struct ghes.

Re: [PATCH 01/11] ACPI / APEI: Move the estatus queue code up, and under its own ifdef

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 06:55:56PM +, James Morse wrote: > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_NMI > +/* > + * While printk() now has an in_nmi() path, the handling for CPER records > + * does not. For example, memory_failure_queue() takes spinlocks and calls > + * schedule_work_on(). > + * > + * So

Re: [PATCH 00/11] APEI in_nmi() rework and arm64 SDEI wire-up

James Morse writes: > Hello! Hi > > The aim of this series is to wire arm64's SDEI into APEI. > [...] > > Trees... The changes outside APEI are tiny, but there will be some changes > to how arch/arm64/mm/fault.c generates signals, affecting do_sea() that will > cause

Re: [PATCH 08/11] firmware: arm_sdei: Add ACPI GHES registration helper

Hi James, One typo below. James Morse writes: > APEI's Generic Hardware Error Source structures do not describe > whether the SDEI event is shared or private, as this information is > discoverable via the API. > > GHES needs to know whether an event is normal or critical

Re: [PATCH 05/11] arm64: KVM/mm: Move SEA handling behind a single 'claim' interface

One typo in the commit log otherwise looks good. James Morse writes: > To split up APEIs in_nmi() path, we need the nmi-like callers to always > be in_nmi(). Add a helper to do the work and claim the notification. > > When KVM or the arch code takes an exception that might

Re: [PATCH 02/11] ACPI / APEI: Generalise the estatus queue's add/remove and notify code

A few of typos and comments below. James Morse writes: > To support asynchronous NMI-like notifications on arm64 we need to use > the estatus-queue. These patches refactor it to allow multiple APEI > notification types to use it. > > Refactor the estatus queue's pool

Re: [PATCH 01/11] ACPI / APEI: Move the estatus queue code up, and under its own ifdef

Hi James, A couple of nitpicks below. James Morse writes: > To support asynchronous NMI-like notifications on arm64 we need to use > the estatus-queue. These patches refactor it to allow multiple APEI > notification types to use it. > > First we move the estatus-queue code

Re: [PATCH v4 10/19] KVM: arm/arm64: Do not use kern_hyp_va() with kvm_vgic_global_state

On 19/02/18 14:39, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 09:33:39AM +, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> On 16/02/18 09:05, Christoffer Dall wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 01:22:56PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote: On 15/01/18 15:36, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at

Re: [PATCH 1/4] iommu: Add virtio-iommu driver

On 19/02/18 12:23, Tomasz Nowicki wrote: [...] >> +static int viommu_receive_resp(struct viommu_dev *viommu, int nr_sent, >> + struct list_head *sent) >> +{ >> + >> +unsigned int len; >> +int nr_received = 0; >> +struct viommu_request *req, *pending; >> + >> +