Thread (16 messages) flat view 16 messages, 6 authors, 2018-09-03

[PATCH] EDAC, ghes: use CPER module handles to locate DIMMs

From: james.morse@arm.com (James Morse)
Date: 2018-08-30 10:48:22
Also in: linux-edac, lkml

Hi Fan,

On 29/08/18 19:33, Fan Wu wrote:
The current ghes_edac driver does not update per-dimm error
counters when reporting memory errors, because there is no
platform-independent way to find DIMMs based on the error
information provided by firmware.
I'd argue there is: its in the CPER records, we just didn't do anything useful
with the information in the past!

This patch offers a solution
for platforms whose firmwares provide valid module handles
(SMBIOS type 17) in error records. In this case ghes_edac will
use the module handles to locate DIMMs and thus makes per-dimm
error reporting possible.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c b/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
index 473aeec..db527f0 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
@@ -81,6 +81,26 @@ static void ghes_edac_count_dimms(const struct dmi_header *dh, void *arg)
 		(*num_dimm)++;
 }
 
+static int ghes_edac_dimm_index(u16 handle)
+{
+	struct mem_ctl_info *mci;
+	int i;
+
+	if (!ghes_pvt)
+		return -1;
ghes_edac_report_mem_error() already checked this, as its the only caller there
is no need to check it again.

+	mci = ghes_pvt->mci;
+
+	if (!mci)
+		return -1;
Can this happen? ghes_edac_report_mem_error() would have dereferenced this already!

If you need the struct mem_ctl_info, you may as well pass it in as the only
caller has it to hand.

quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+
+	for (i = 0; i < mci->tot_dimms; i++) {
+		if (mci->dimms[i]->smbios_handle == handle)
+			return i;
+	}
+	return -1;
+}
+
 static void ghes_edac_dmidecode(const struct dmi_header *dh, void *arg)
 {
 	struct ghes_edac_dimm_fill *dimm_fill = arg;
@@ -177,6 +197,8 @@ static void ghes_edac_dmidecode(const struct dmi_header *dh, void *arg)
 				entry->total_width, entry->data_width);
 		}
 
+		dimm->smbios_handle = entry->handle;
We aren't checking for duplicate handles, (e.g. they're all zero). I think this
is fine as chances are firmware on those systems won't set
CPER_MEM_VALID_MODULE_HANDLE. If it does, the handle it gives us is ambiguous,
and we pick a dimm, instead of whine-ing about broken firmware tables.

(I'm just drawing attention to it in case someone disagrees)

quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
 		dimm_fill->count++;
 	}
 }
@@ -327,12 +349,20 @@ void ghes_edac_report_mem_error(int sev, struct cper_sec_mem_err *mem_err)
 		p += sprintf(p, "bit_pos:%d ", mem_err->bit_pos);
 	if (mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_MODULE_HANDLE) {
 		const char *bank = NULL, *device = NULL;
+		int index = -1;
+
 		dmi_memdev_name(mem_err->mem_dev_handle, &bank, &device);
+		p += sprintf(p, "DIMM DMI handle: 0x%.4x ",
+			     mem_err->mem_dev_handle);
 		if (bank != NULL && device != NULL)
 			p += sprintf(p, "DIMM location:%s %s ", bank, device);
-		else
-			p += sprintf(p, "DIMM DMI handle: 0x%.4x ",
-				     mem_err->mem_dev_handle);
Why do we now print the handle every time? The handle is pretty meaningless, it
can only be used to find the location-strings, if we get those we print them
instead.

+		index = ghes_edac_dimm_index(mem_err->mem_dev_handle);
+		if (index >= 0) {
+			e->top_layer = index;
+			e->enable_per_layer_report = true;
+		}
+
 	}
 	if (p > e->location)
 		*(p - 1) = '\0';
Looks good to me!


Thanks,

James
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help