| Message ID | 1502971638-31670-1-git-send-email-gengdongjiu@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | Rafael Wysocki |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 08:07:18PM +0800, Dongjiu Geng wrote: > The revision 0x300 generic error data entry is different > from the old version, but currently iterating through the > GHES estatus blocks does not take into account this difference. > This will lead to failure to get the right data entry if GHES > has revision 0x300 error data entry. > > Update the GHES estatus iteration to properly increment using > iteration macro, This is not what I meant - I meant: "Update the GHES estatus iteration macro to properly increment using acpi_hest_get_next(), and ..." But you don't need to send another version. Rafael, please correct that when applying, instead. Thanks.
On Thursday, August 17, 2017 1:43:49 PM CEST Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 08:07:18PM +0800, Dongjiu Geng wrote: > > The revision 0x300 generic error data entry is different > > from the old version, but currently iterating through the > > GHES estatus blocks does not take into account this difference. > > This will lead to failure to get the right data entry if GHES > > has revision 0x300 error data entry. > > > > Update the GHES estatus iteration to properly increment using > > iteration macro, > > This is not what I meant - I meant: > > "Update the GHES estatus iteration macro to properly increment using > acpi_hest_get_next(), and ..." > > But you don't need to send another version. > > Rafael, please correct that when applying, instead. I will, thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thursday, August 17, 2017 1:43:49 PM CEST Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 08:07:18PM +0800, Dongjiu Geng wrote: > > The revision 0x300 generic error data entry is different > > from the old version, but currently iterating through the > > GHES estatus blocks does not take into account this difference. > > This will lead to failure to get the right data entry if GHES > > has revision 0x300 error data entry. > > > > Update the GHES estatus iteration to properly increment using > > iteration macro, > > This is not what I meant - I meant: > > "Update the GHES estatus iteration macro to properly increment using > acpi_hest_get_next(), and ..." > > But you don't need to send another version. > > Rafael, please correct that when applying, instead. Well, I think I did that. :-) Anyway, applied. Thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 2017/8/29 4:57, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Well, I think I did that. :-) > > Anyway, applied. Thanks very much to Rafael and Borislav -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/apei-internal.h b/drivers/acpi/apei/apei-internal.h index 6e9f14c0a71b..cb4126051f62 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/apei-internal.h +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/apei-internal.h @@ -120,11 +120,6 @@ int apei_exec_collect_resources(struct apei_exec_context *ctx, struct dentry; struct dentry *apei_get_debugfs_dir(void); -#define apei_estatus_for_each_section(estatus, section) \ - for (section = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data *)(estatus + 1); \ - (void *)section - (void *)estatus < estatus->data_length; \ - section = (void *)(section+1) + section->error_data_length) - static inline u32 cper_estatus_len(struct acpi_hest_generic_status *estatus) { if (estatus->raw_data_length) diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c index 48a8f69da42a..bf3672a81e49 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c @@ -606,7 +606,6 @@ void cper_estatus_print(const char *pfx, const struct acpi_hest_generic_status *estatus) { struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata; - unsigned int data_len; int sec_no = 0; char newpfx[64]; __u16 severity; @@ -617,14 +616,10 @@ void cper_estatus_print(const char *pfx, "It has been corrected by h/w " "and requires no further action"); printk("%s""event severity: %s\n", pfx, cper_severity_str(severity)); - data_len = estatus->data_length; - gdata = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data *)(estatus + 1); snprintf(newpfx, sizeof(newpfx), "%s%s", pfx, INDENT_SP); - while (data_len >= acpi_hest_get_size(gdata)) { + apei_estatus_for_each_section(estatus, gdata) { cper_estatus_print_section(newpfx, gdata, sec_no); - data_len -= acpi_hest_get_record_size(gdata); - gdata = acpi_hest_get_next(gdata); sec_no++; } } @@ -653,15 +648,12 @@ int cper_estatus_check(const struct acpi_hest_generic_status *estatus) if (rc) return rc; data_len = estatus->data_length; - gdata = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data *)(estatus + 1); - while (data_len >= acpi_hest_get_size(gdata)) { + apei_estatus_for_each_section(estatus, gdata) { gedata_len = acpi_hest_get_error_length(gdata); if (gedata_len > data_len - acpi_hest_get_size(gdata)) return -EINVAL; - data_len -= acpi_hest_get_record_size(gdata); - gdata = acpi_hest_get_next(gdata); } if (data_len) return -EINVAL; diff --git a/include/acpi/ghes.h b/include/acpi/ghes.h index 9f26e01186ae..9061c5c743b3 100644 --- a/include/acpi/ghes.h +++ b/include/acpi/ghes.h @@ -113,6 +113,11 @@ static inline void *acpi_hest_get_next(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata) return (void *)(gdata) + acpi_hest_get_record_size(gdata); } +#define apei_estatus_for_each_section(estatus, section) \ + for (section = (struct acpi_hest_generic_data *)(estatus + 1); \ + (void *)section - (void *)(estatus + 1) < estatus->data_length; \ + section = acpi_hest_get_next(section)) + int ghes_notify_sea(void); #endif /* GHES_H */