From: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
yazen.ghannam@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, bilbao@vt.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Unify vendors grading logic and provide AMD machine error checks
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 10:03:18 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7967cc8f-11af-0236-9ed6-ea9a84702965@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YievKnn5hSK0AvMt@nazgul.tnic>
On 3/8/2022 1:32 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:41:34PM -0600, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
>> AMD's severity grading covers very few machine errors. In the graded cases
>> there are no user-readable messages, complicating debugging of critical
>> hardware errors. Furthermore, with the current implementation AMD MCEs have
>> no support for the severities-coverage file. Adding new severities for AMD
>> with the current logic would be too convoluted.
>>
>> Fix the above issues including AMD severities to the severity table, in
>> combination with Intel MCEs. Unify the severity grading logic of both
>> vendors. Label the vendor-specific cases (e.g. cases with different
>> registers) where checks cannot be implicit with the available features.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/include/asm/mce.h | 7 ++
>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c | 188 +++++++++++++++--------------
>> 2 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)
>
> Sorry, maybe you're too new to this and you probably haven't read the
> old discussions we have had about the severity grading turd. In order to
> save you some time: adding more to that macro insanity is not going to
> happen.
>
> The AMD severity grading functions are *actually* readable vs this
> abomination which I hate with passion.
>
> If you want to add more logic, you should add to mce_severity_amd(),
> perhaps call other helper functions which grade based on a certain
> aspect of the error type, split the logic, use comments, etc, but
> *definitely* not this.
>
> Thx.
>
Understood, sending a new patch in that direction.
Thanks,
Carlos
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-09 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-08 18:41 Carlos Bilbao
2022-03-08 19:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-03-09 16:03 ` Carlos Bilbao [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7967cc8f-11af-0236-9ed6-ea9a84702965@amd.com \
--to=carlos.bilbao@amd.com \
--cc=bilbao@vt.edu \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yazen.ghannam@amd.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®