[PATCH v5 00/20] APEI in_nmi() rework and arm64 SDEI wire-up
From: james.morse@arm.com (James Morse)
Date: 2018-07-05 15:42:59
Also in:
kvmarm, linux-acpi, linux-mm
Hi guys, On 05/07/18 10:50, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 7:00:56 PM CEST James Morse wrote:quoted
The aim of this series is to wire arm64's SDEI into APEI. On arm64 we have three APEI notifications that are NMI-like, and in the unlikely event that all three are supported by a platform, they can interrupt each other. The GHES driver shouldn't have to deal with this, so this series aims to make it re-entrant. To do that, we refactor the estatus queue to allow multiple notifications to use it, then convert NOTIFY_SEA to always be described as NMI-like, and to use the estatus queue. From here we push the locking and fixmap choices out to the notification functions, and remove the use of per-ghes estatus and flags. This removes the in_nmi() 'timebomb' in ghes_copy_tofrom_phys(). Things get sticky when an NMI notification needs to know how big the CPER records might be, before reading it. This series splits ghes_estatus_read() to let us peek at the buffer. A side effect of this is the 20byte header will get read twice. (how does it work today? it reads the records into a per-ghes worst-case sized buffer, allocates the correct size and copies the records. in_nmi() use of this per-ghes buffer needs eliminating). One alternative was to trust firmware's 'max raw data length' and use that to allocate 'enough' memory. We don't use this value today, so its probably wrong on some sytem somewhere. Since v4 patches 5,8-15 are new, otherwise changes are noted in the patch.
Tony, I need your help with reviewing the APEI-related material here. Can you please have a look at this series and let me know if there are any concerns regarding it?
Thanks. I think the only context from earlier versions is where Borislav spotted some issues with the ghes_proc() call at probe time and NMI-like notifications.
From https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg653332.html :
| Which means, that this code is not really reentrant and if should be | fixed to be callable from different contexts, then it should use private | buffers and be careful about locking. ... the patches for which have bloated this series. Thanks, James