在 2024/5/24 23:15, Shiyang Ruan 写道:
在 2024/5/22 14:45, Dan Williams 写道:
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
[..]
My expectation is MF_ACTION_REQUIRED is not appropriate for CXL event
reported errors since action is only required for direct consumption
events and those need not be reported through the
在 2024/5/22 14:45, Dan Williams 写道:
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
[..]
My expectation is MF_ACTION_REQUIRED is not appropriate for CXL event
reported errors since action is only required for direct consumption
events and those need not be reported through the device event queue.
Got it.
I'm not
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
[..]
> >> My expectation is MF_ACTION_REQUIRED is not appropriate for CXL event
> >> reported errors since action is only required for direct consumption
> >> events and those need not be reported through the device event queue.
> > Got it.
>
> I'm not very sure about 'Host
在 2024/5/3 19:32, Shiyang Ruan 写道:
在 2024/4/24 2:40, Dan Williams 写道:
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent.
As it should be.
OS needs to be notified then it could handle poison pages in time.
On Fri, 3 May 2024 18:42:31 +0800
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> 在 2024/4/24 1:57, Ira Weiny 写道:
> > Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> >> Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
> >> and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent. OS needs to be notified then it
> >> could handle poison
在 2024/4/24 2:40, Dan Williams 写道:
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent.
As it should be.
OS needs to be notified then it could handle poison pages in time.
No, it was always the case that
在 2024/4/24 1:57, Ira Weiny 写道:
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent. OS needs to be notified then it
could handle poison pages in time. Per CXL spec, the device error event
could be signaled
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
> and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent.
As it should be.
> OS needs to be notified then it could handle poison pages in time.
No, it was always the case that latent poison is an "action optional"
Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
> and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent. OS needs to be notified then it
> could handle poison pages in time. Per CXL spec, the device error event
> could be signaled through FW-First and OS-First
:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240417075053.3273543-3-ruansy.fnst%40fujitsu.com
patch subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] cxl/core: add poison creation event handler
config: csky-randconfig-002-20240421
(https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240421/202404212044.usxtgrtl-...@intel.com/config)
compiler: csky-linux
在 2024/4/18 1:30, Dave Jiang 写道:
On 4/17/24 12:50 AM, Shiyang Ruan wrote:
Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent. OS needs to be notified then it
could handle poison pages in time. Per CXL spec, the device error
On 4/17/24 12:50 AM, Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
> and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent. OS needs to be notified then it
> could handle poison pages in time. Per CXL spec, the device error event
> could be signaled through
Currently driver only traces cxl events, poison creation (for both vmem
and pmem type) on cxl memdev is silent. OS needs to be notified then it
could handle poison pages in time. Per CXL spec, the device error event
could be signaled through FW-First and OS-First methods.
So, add poison
13 matches
Mail list logo
