Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/2] papr/scm: Add bad memory ranges to nvdimm bad ranges
Christophe Leroy writes:
> Le 09/07/2020 à 09:56, Santosh Sivaraj a écrit :
>> Subscribe to the MCE notification and add the physical address which
>> generated a memory error to nvdimm bad range.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Mahesh Salgaonkar
>> Signed-off-by: Santosh Sivaraj
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c | 98 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 97 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c
>> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c
>> index 9c569078a09fd..5ebb1c797795d 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c
>> @@ -13,9 +13,11 @@
>> #include
>> #include
>> #include
>> +#include
>>
>> #include
>> #include
>> +#include
>>
>> #define BIND_ANY_ADDR (~0ul)
>>
>> @@ -80,6 +82,7 @@ struct papr_scm_priv {
>> struct resource res;
>> struct nd_region *region;
>> struct nd_interleave_set nd_set;
>> +struct list_head region_list;
>>
>> /* Protect dimm health data from concurrent read/writes */
>> struct mutex health_mutex;
>> @@ -91,6 +94,9 @@ struct papr_scm_priv {
>> u64 health_bitmap;
>> };
>>
>> +LIST_HEAD(papr_nd_regions);
>> +DEFINE_MUTEX(papr_ndr_lock);
>> +
>> static int drc_pmem_bind(struct papr_scm_priv *p)
>> {
>> unsigned long ret[PLPAR_HCALL_BUFSIZE];
>> @@ -759,6 +765,10 @@ static int papr_scm_nvdimm_init(struct papr_scm_priv *p)
>> dev_info(dev, "Region registered with target node %d and online
>> node %d",
>> target_nid, online_nid);
>>
>> +mutex_lock(_ndr_lock);
>> +list_add_tail(>region_list, _nd_regions);
>> +mutex_unlock(_ndr_lock);
>> +
>> return 0;
>>
>> err: nvdimm_bus_unregister(p->bus);
>> @@ -766,6 +776,70 @@ err:nvdimm_bus_unregister(p->bus);
>> return -ENXIO;
>> }
>>
>> +static void papr_scm_add_badblock(struct nd_region *region,
>> + struct nvdimm_bus *bus, u64 phys_addr)
>> +{
>> +u64 aligned_addr = ALIGN_DOWN(phys_addr, L1_CACHE_BYTES);
>> +
>> +if (nvdimm_bus_add_badrange(bus, aligned_addr, L1_CACHE_BYTES)) {
>> +pr_err("Bad block registration for 0x%llx failed\n", phys_addr);
>> +return;
>> +}
>> +
>> +pr_debug("Add memory range (0x%llx - 0x%llx) as bad range\n",
>> + aligned_addr, aligned_addr + L1_CACHE_BYTES);
>> +
>> +nvdimm_region_notify(region, NVDIMM_REVALIDATE_POISON);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int handle_mce_ue(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val,
>> + void *data)
>> +{
>> +struct machine_check_event *evt = data;
>> +struct papr_scm_priv *p;
>> +u64 phys_addr;
>> +bool found = false;
>> +
>> +if (evt->error_type != MCE_ERROR_TYPE_UE)
>> +return NOTIFY_DONE;
>> +
>> +if (list_empty(_nd_regions))
>> +return NOTIFY_DONE;
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * The physical address obtained here is PAGE_SIZE aligned, so get the
>> + * exact address from the effective address
>> + */
>> +phys_addr = evt->u.ue_error.physical_address +
>> +(evt->u.ue_error.effective_address & ~PAGE_MASK);
>
> Not properly aligned
Will fix it.
>
>> +
>> +if (!evt->u.ue_error.physical_address_provided ||
>> +!is_zone_device_page(pfn_to_page(phys_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT)))
>> +return NOTIFY_DONE;
>> +
>> +/* mce notifier is called from a process context, so mutex is safe */
>> +mutex_lock(_ndr_lock);
>> +list_for_each_entry(p, _nd_regions, region_list) {
>> +struct resource res = p->res;
>
> Is this local struct really worth it ? Why not use p->res below directly ?
>
Right, not really needed. I can fix that in v2.
>> +
>> +if (phys_addr >= res.start && phys_addr <= res.end) {
>> +found = true;
>> +break;
>> +}
>> +}
>> +
>> +if (found)
>> +papr_scm_add_badblock(p->region, p->bus, phys_addr);
>> +
>> +mutex_unlock(_ndr_lock);
>> +
>> +return found ? NOTIFY_OK : NOTIFY_DONE;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct notifier_block mce_ue_nb = {
>> +.notifier_call = handle_mce_ue
>> +};
>> +
>> static int papr_scm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> {
>> struct device_node *dn = pdev->dev.of_node;
>> @@ -866,6 +940,10 @@ static int papr_scm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> {
>> struct papr_scm_priv *p = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>
>> +mutex_lock(_ndr_lock);
>> +list_del(&(p->region_list));
>> +mutex_unlock(_ndr_lock);
>> +
>> nvdimm_bus_unregister(p->bus);
>> drc_pmem_unbind(p);
>> kfree(p->bus_desc.provider_name);
>> @@ -888,7 +966,25 @@ static struct platform_driver papr_scm_driver = {
>> },
>> };
>>
>> -module_platform_driver(papr_scm_driver);
>> +static int __init papr_scm_init(void)
>> +{
>> +int ret;
>> +
>> +ret =
Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/2] papr/scm: Add bad memory ranges to nvdimm bad ranges
Le 09/07/2020 à 09:56, Santosh Sivaraj a écrit :
Subscribe to the MCE notification and add the physical address which
generated a memory error to nvdimm bad range.
Reviewed-by: Mahesh Salgaonkar
Signed-off-by: Santosh Sivaraj
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c | 98 ++-
1 file changed, 97 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c
b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c
index 9c569078a09fd..5ebb1c797795d 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/papr_scm.c
@@ -13,9 +13,11 @@
#include
#include
#include
+#include
#include
#include
+#include
#define BIND_ANY_ADDR (~0ul)
@@ -80,6 +82,7 @@ struct papr_scm_priv {
struct resource res;
struct nd_region *region;
struct nd_interleave_set nd_set;
+ struct list_head region_list;
/* Protect dimm health data from concurrent read/writes */
struct mutex health_mutex;
@@ -91,6 +94,9 @@ struct papr_scm_priv {
u64 health_bitmap;
};
+LIST_HEAD(papr_nd_regions);
+DEFINE_MUTEX(papr_ndr_lock);
+
static int drc_pmem_bind(struct papr_scm_priv *p)
{
unsigned long ret[PLPAR_HCALL_BUFSIZE];
@@ -759,6 +765,10 @@ static int papr_scm_nvdimm_init(struct papr_scm_priv *p)
dev_info(dev, "Region registered with target node %d and online node
%d",
target_nid, online_nid);
+ mutex_lock(_ndr_lock);
+ list_add_tail(>region_list, _nd_regions);
+ mutex_unlock(_ndr_lock);
+
return 0;
err: nvdimm_bus_unregister(p->bus);
@@ -766,6 +776,70 @@ err: nvdimm_bus_unregister(p->bus);
return -ENXIO;
}
+static void papr_scm_add_badblock(struct nd_region *region,
+ struct nvdimm_bus *bus, u64 phys_addr)
+{
+ u64 aligned_addr = ALIGN_DOWN(phys_addr, L1_CACHE_BYTES);
+
+ if (nvdimm_bus_add_badrange(bus, aligned_addr, L1_CACHE_BYTES)) {
+ pr_err("Bad block registration for 0x%llx failed\n", phys_addr);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ pr_debug("Add memory range (0x%llx - 0x%llx) as bad range\n",
+aligned_addr, aligned_addr + L1_CACHE_BYTES);
+
+ nvdimm_region_notify(region, NVDIMM_REVALIDATE_POISON);
+}
+
+static int handle_mce_ue(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val,
+void *data)
+{
+ struct machine_check_event *evt = data;
+ struct papr_scm_priv *p;
+ u64 phys_addr;
+ bool found = false;
+
+ if (evt->error_type != MCE_ERROR_TYPE_UE)
+ return NOTIFY_DONE;
+
+ if (list_empty(_nd_regions))
+ return NOTIFY_DONE;
+
+ /*
+* The physical address obtained here is PAGE_SIZE aligned, so get the
+* exact address from the effective address
+*/
+ phys_addr = evt->u.ue_error.physical_address +
+ (evt->u.ue_error.effective_address & ~PAGE_MASK);
Not properly aligned
+
+ if (!evt->u.ue_error.physical_address_provided ||
+ !is_zone_device_page(pfn_to_page(phys_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT)))
+ return NOTIFY_DONE;
+
+ /* mce notifier is called from a process context, so mutex is safe */
+ mutex_lock(_ndr_lock);
+ list_for_each_entry(p, _nd_regions, region_list) {
+ struct resource res = p->res;
Is this local struct really worth it ? Why not use p->res below directly ?
+
+ if (phys_addr >= res.start && phys_addr <= res.end) {
+ found = true;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (found)
+ papr_scm_add_badblock(p->region, p->bus, phys_addr);
+
+ mutex_unlock(_ndr_lock);
+
+ return found ? NOTIFY_OK : NOTIFY_DONE;
+}
+
+static struct notifier_block mce_ue_nb = {
+ .notifier_call = handle_mce_ue
+};
+
static int papr_scm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct device_node *dn = pdev->dev.of_node;
@@ -866,6 +940,10 @@ static int papr_scm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct papr_scm_priv *p = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+ mutex_lock(_ndr_lock);
+ list_del(&(p->region_list));
+ mutex_unlock(_ndr_lock);
+
nvdimm_bus_unregister(p->bus);
drc_pmem_unbind(p);
kfree(p->bus_desc.provider_name);
@@ -888,7 +966,25 @@ static struct platform_driver papr_scm_driver = {
},
};
-module_platform_driver(papr_scm_driver);
+static int __init papr_scm_init(void)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = platform_driver_register(_scm_driver);
+ if (!ret)
+ mce_register_notifier(_ue_nb);
+
+return ret;
Not properly aligned.
+}
+module_init(papr_scm_init);
+
+static void __exit papr_scm_exit(void)
+{
+ mce_unregister_notifier(_ue_nb);
+ platform_driver_unregister(_scm_driver);
+}
+module_exit(papr_scm_exit);
+
