Re: [PATCH 0/2] ESRT fixes for relocatable kexec'd kernel

Tyler, # I missed catching your patch as its subject doesn't contain arm64. On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 12:42:31PM -0700, Tyler Baicar wrote: > Currently on arm64 ESRT memory does not appear to be properly blocked off. > Upon successful initialization, ESRT prints out the memory region that it >

Re: [PATCH V1 1/3] x86/efi: Call efi_delete_dummy_variable() during efi subsystem initialization

Hi Sai, Thank you for the patch! Yet something to improve: [auto build test ERROR on linus/master] [also build test ERROR on v4.16-rc3 next-20180227] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux

Re: [PATCH v1] efi/apple-properties: Use memremap() instead of ioremap()

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 07:27:10PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > The memory we are accessing through virtual address has no IO side > effects. Moreover, for IO memory we have to use special accessors, > which we don't use. > > Due to above, convert the driver to use memremap() instead of

Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 09:32:18PM +, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > Not much more readable. It's still vague and confusing to a user and devoid > of any real info so an expert can't help. And now the information is printed > arbitrarily, so someone needs to read the source to figure out what it

RE: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 2:10 PM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org; Tony Luck >

Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 06:40:13PM +, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > Code readability. Bullshit! You can't tell me this: snprintf(newpfx, sizeof(newpfx), "%s ", pfx); is less readable than: snprintf(newpfx, sizeof(newpfx), "%s%s", pfx, INDENT_SP); > 1) No one except debug and

RE: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 1:03 PM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Section

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 06:06:21PM +, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > It's not just about arches but record types. A single platform can report > using arch-specific records, memory records, PCIe records, etc. > > So all the other record types only show fields with a valid bit set and this > has

RE: [PATCH v2 2/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Section

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 12:45 PM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 05:46:54PM +, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > I think there's value in following the conventions in a subsystem. "conventions in a subsystem" my ass. That's brainless copy-pasting. It was added by f6edea77c8c8 ("ACPI, APEI, CPER: Cleanup CPER memory error output format")

RE: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 12:04 PM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Section

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 05:27:39PM +, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > Sure, we can print the fields unconditionally if Ard is okay with that. > > The issue is that the x86 behavior will be different from all the others, so > that > might be confusing. Confusing for whom? Are we sharing tools with

Re: [PATCH v1] efi/apple-properties: Use memremap() instead of ioremap()

On 27 February 2018 at 17:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > The memory we are accessing through virtual address has no IO side > effects. Moreover, for IO memory we have to use special accessors, > which we don't use. > Not 100% relevant in this context, but perhaps

RE: [PATCH v2 2/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Section

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 12:01 PM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

[PATCH v1] efi/apple-properties: Use memremap() instead of ioremap()

The memory we are accessing through virtual address has no IO side effects. Moreover, for IO memory we have to use special accessors, which we don't use. Due to above, convert the driver to use memremap() instead of ioremap(). Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Cache, TLB, and Bus Check structures

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 03:33:44PM +, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > I agree which is why I've included the Validation Bits. A user can then > check the Validation Bits for any field that is of interest but missing. No, no half-baked fields. So you know drivers/edac/mce_amd.c, right? And you know

Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 03:25:06PM +, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > This is the same as the other CPER code. Dude, turn on brain! So if it is in the other CPER code, we should copy it, no matter how dumb it is?!? > Also, the spec allows platform-defined GUIDs. So we should always print this >

Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Section

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 03:13:11PM +, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > I decided to print the Validation Bits as a sanity check for whomever is > looking > at this. Since we only print fields with a valid bit, it may be confusing for > users > who don't know why fields are missing. I suggested what

RE: [PATCH v2 5/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Cache, TLB, and Bus Check structures

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 10:04 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] efi: Decode UEFI-defined IA32/X64 Error Structure GUIDs

On 27 February 2018 at 15:28, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] >> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 9:30 AM >> To: Ghannam, Yazen >> Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org;

RE: [PATCH v2 4/8] efi: Decode UEFI-defined IA32/X64 Error Structure GUIDs

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 9:30 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

RE: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 9:26 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

RE: [PATCH v2 2/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Section

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 6:23 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

RE: [PATCH v2 1/8] efi: Fix IA32/X64 Processor Error Record definition

> -Original Message- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 5:47 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen > Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2

Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Cache, TLB, and Bus Check structures

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:39:01PM -0600, Yazen Ghannam wrote: > +static void print_err_info(const char *pfx, u8 err_type, u64 check) > +{ > + u16 validation_bits = CHECK_VALID_BITS(check); > + > + printk("%sValidation Bits: 0x%04x\n", pfx, validation_bits); > + > + if (err_type ==

Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] efi: Decode UEFI-defined IA32/X64 Error Structure GUIDs

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:39:00PM -0600, Yazen Ghannam wrote: > @@ -45,6 +81,11 @@ void cper_print_proc_ia(const char *pfx, const struct > cper_sec_proc_ia *proc) > printk("%sError Structure Type: %pUl\n", newpfx, > _info->err_type); > > +

Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:38:59PM -0600, Yazen Ghannam wrote: > From: Yazen Ghannam > > Print the fields in the IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure. > > Based on UEFI 2.7 Table 256. IA32/X64 Processor Error Information > Structure. > > Signed-off-by: Yazen Ghannam

Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Section

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:38:58PM -0600, Yazen Ghannam wrote: > + * We don't need a "CPER_IA" prefix since these are all locally defined. > + * This will save us a lot of line space. > + */ > +#define VALID_LAPIC_ID BIT_ULL(0) > +#define VALID_CPUID_INFO

Re: [RFC PATCH v1] efi/apple-properties: Assume 32-bit values only for now

On Tue, 2018-02-27 at 12:55 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, 2018-02-27 at 06:20 +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > In that case it can't use built-in device properties at all. I think I know how to avoid this. But it requires some time to implement. -- Andy Shevchenko

Re: [RFC PATCH v1] efi/apple-properties: Assume 32-bit values only for now

On Tue, 2018-02-27 at 06:20 +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:32:48PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > There is as far as we know no type field in the struct dev_header > > provided. Thus, assume that values of all properties are type of > > u32. > > There is no type field,

Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] efi: Fix IA32/X64 Processor Error Record definition

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:38:57PM -0600, Yazen Ghannam wrote: > From: Yazen Ghannam > > Based on UEFI 2.7 Table 255. Processor Error Record, the "Local APIC_ID" My pdf says this is table 252. > field is 8 bytes but Linux defines this field as 1 byte. > > Fix this in

Re: 91f606a8fa ("x86/mm: Replace compile-time checks for 5-level .."): BUG: kernel reboot-without-warning in boot stage

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:14:06PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > Greetings, > > 0day kernel testing robot got the below dmesg and the first bad commit is > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git x86/mm > > commit 91f606a8fa68264224cbc76888fa8649cdbe9990 > Author: