On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 08:11:24AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 02:14:38AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > Device driver firmware can crash, and sometimes, this can leave your > > system in a state which makes the device or subsystem completely > > useless. Detecting this by inspecting /proc/sys/kernel/tainted instead > > of scraping some magical words from the kernel log, which is driver > > specific, is much easier. So instead provide a helper which lets drivers > > annotate this. > > > > Once this happens, scrapers can easily scrape modules taint flags. > > This will taint both the kernel and respective calling module. > > > > The new helper module_firmware_crashed() uses LOCKDEP_STILL_OK as > > this fact should in no way shape or form affect lockdep. This taint > > is device driver specific. > > > > Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcg...@kernel.org> > > --- > > > > Below is the full diff stat of manual inspection throughout the kernel > > when this happens. My methodology is to just scrape for "crash" and > > then study the driver a bit to see if indeed it seems like that the > > firmware crashes there. In *many* cases there is even infrastructure > > for this, so this is sometimes clearly obvious. Some other times it > > required a bit of deciphering. > > > > The diff stat below is what I have so far, however the patch below > > only includes the drivers that start with Q, as they were a source of > > inspiration for this, and to make this RFC easier to read. > > > > If this seems sensible, I can follow up with the kernel helper first, > > and then tackle each subsystem independently. > > > > I purposely skipped review of remoteproc and virtualization. That should > > require its own separate careful review and considerations. > > > > drivers/atm/nicstar.c | 1 + > > drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c | 1 + > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c | 1 + > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu_state.c | 2 ++ > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gpu.c | 1 + > > I'm not finding the drm changes in your diff below ...
That was on purpose, as this was an RFC and I didnt' want to clutter this with noise. > Also what Kees > said, I think best to split this up and properly cc per > get_maintainers.pl. Sounds good. Luis