On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 02:37:00AM +0100, Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong wrote:
> On 7/16/2015 10:18 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 01:31:55AM +0100, Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang wrote:
> >> +pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr)
> >> +{
> >> + if (efi_mem_attributes(addr) & EFI_MEMORY_UC)
> >> + return PROT_DEVICE_nGnRE;
> >> + else
> >> + return PAGE_KERNEL;
> >> +}
> >
> > Do we really need a new file and out-of-line call for this?
> We have a choice of either adding this function to
> arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c, or creating
> arch/arm64/kernel/apei.c. As we continue to work on firmware first
> HW error handling for arm64, more arm64 specific APEI related functions
> may need to be implemented, thus I think it would be good to create
> arch/arm64/kernel/apei.c. That being said, to date we have found
> the needs to have only two arm64 specific APEI related functions.
> The other one can be found in LEG kernel, through this commit:
> aa2d69c88b27 ACPI, APEI, ARM64: APEI initial support for aarch64
> My understanding is that Linaro will work on to upstream that commit. I
> do not strongly prefer either choice.
>
> When APEI ghes driver maps the memory region that has error record
> updated by firmware, it executes in IRQ, timer or SEA handler. Since
> ioremap() can not be used in atomic context, so APEI implements a
> special version of atomic ioremap function calling ioremap_page_range().
> On the other hand, x86 and ARM64 have different ways to define pgprot_t
> for page that needs to be accessed with uncached property. x86 defines
> PAGE_KERNEL_NOCACHE, while arm64 defines PROT_DEVICE_nGnRE. Therefore
> arch specific implementation is needed.
> There are other ways to achieve such needs. V3 of this
> patch set tried another way [1]. I think the current way makes the most
> sense, since it made generic APEI code to stay generic (no knowledge
> about EFI, no arch dependent ifdefs).
I understand what you're doing and my concern was much simpler than you
seem to imagine. Put another way: why can't arch_apei_get_mem_attribute
be a static inline in a header file (like acpi_os_ioremap in asm/acpi.h)?
Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
