On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:55:14 +0200
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > but only keep the number of fields we export to a minimum. If we
> > always use the names in the spec, and user-space always parses the
> > 'format' file, we should be able to add more fields when they turn out
> > to be necessary. (l
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 05:42:42PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> > Alternatively, you can extend arm_event to get issued with *each*
> > cper_arm_err_info but that would mean a lot of redundant information
> > being shuffled out to userspace.
>
> I think this is what we should do,
Yes, that should
Hi guys,
(CC: Punit)
On 26/06/17 15:06, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 11:38:23AM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote:
>> Add a new trace event for ARM processor error information, so that
>> the user will know what error occurred. With this information the
>> user may take appropriate actio
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 09:40:18AM -0600, Baicar, Tyler wrote:
> ... but there is obviously only one of those. That is something that may
> be easy to add to the arm_event TP...or do that in a separate TP as
> well.
See here:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170626140647.anigiqhk3l6lt...@pd.tnic
for
On 6/27/2017 1:25 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 02:51:22PM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote:
How about we report the full info via arm_err_info_event which just for someone
who want the detail information, and leave arm_event closed. If someone do not
care the error detail, who could
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:41:34 +0800
Xie XiuQi wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> On 2017/6/26 21:36, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 11:38:23 +0800
> > Xie XiuQi wrote:
> >
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/cper.h b/include/linux/cper.h
> >> index 4c671fc..17546
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 02:51:22PM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote:
> How about we report the full info via arm_err_info_event which just for
> someone
> who want the detail information, and leave arm_event closed. If someone do not
> care the error detail, who could just open arm_event.
So the way I read
Hi Boris,
Thanks for your comments.
On 2017/6/26 22:06, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 11:38:23AM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote:
>> Add a new trace event for ARM processor error information, so that
>> the user will know what error occurred. With this information the
>> user may take a
Hi Steve,
Thanks for your comments.
On 2017/6/26 21:36, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 11:38:23 +0800
> Xie XiuQi wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/cper.h b/include/linux/cper.h
>> index 4c671fc..17546bf 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/cper.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/cper.h
>> @@
On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 11:38:23AM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote:
> Add a new trace event for ARM processor error information, so that
> the user will know what error occurred. With this information the
> user may take appropriate action.
>
> These trace events are consistent with the ARM processor error
On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 11:38:23 +0800
Xie XiuQi wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/cper.h b/include/linux/cper.h
> index 4c671fc..17546bf 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cper.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cper.h
> @@ -275,6 +275,11 @@ enum {
> #define CPER_ARM_INFO_FLAGS_PROPAGATED BIT(2)
>
Add a new trace event for ARM processor error information, so that
the user will know what error occurred. With this information the
user may take appropriate action.
These trace events are consistent with the ARM processor error
information table which defined in UEFI 2.6 spec section N.2.4.4.1.
12 matches
Mail list logo