<br><br>On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 7:26 AM, Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><div class="plaintext" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">On 09/06/17 04:14, Manoj Iyer wrote:
<blockquote> Please review and consider this SRU for zesty to add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI
6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64. The patches were cherry-picked from Will
Deacon's for-next tree, and is expected to land in linux-next soon. This
feature is critical for cert on QDF2400 servers. This fixes
bug: <a href="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1696570">https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1696570</a>
A test kernel is available
at <a href="https://launchpad.net/~centriq-team/+archive/ubuntu/lp1696570">https://launchpad.net/~centriq-team/+archive/ubuntu/lp1696570</a>, kernel
builds cleanly for all architectures, and the kernel was boot tested on
ARM64, AMD64 and Power8 systems.
The following changes since commit 1ab07112acbf93410a2b755d9a2b35001e8ecf44:
iommu/iova: Fix underflow bug in __alloc_and_insert_iova_range
(2017-06-08 14:19:37 -0500)
are available in the git repository at:
git+<a href="ssh://git.launchpad.net/~centriq-team/+git/linux-sru">ssh://git.launchpad.net/~centriq-team/+git/linux-sru</a> lp1696570
for you to fetch changes up to 377872015b3a06cecba9597558d194a667e35810:
UBUNTU: [Config] CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_SEA=y (2017-06-08 14:56:40 -0500)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang (1):
acpi: apei: panic OS with fatal error status block
Manoj Iyer (1):
UBUNTU: [Config] CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_SEA=y
Tyler Baicar (10):
acpi: apei: read ack upon ghes record consumption
ras: acpi/apei: cper: add support for generic data v3 structure
cper: add timestamp print to CPER status printing
efi: parse ARM processor error
arm64: exception: handle Synchronous External Abort
acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for ARMv8
efi: print unrecognized CPER section
ras: acpi / apei: generate trace event for unrecognized CPER section
trace, ras: add ARM processor error trace event
arm/arm64: KVM: add guest SEA support
arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_arm.h | 10 ++
arch/arm/include/asm/system_misc.h | 5 +
arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 36 ++++-
arch/arm64/Kconfig | 2 +
arch/arm64/include/asm/esr.h | 1 +
arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_arm.h | 10 ++
arch/arm64/include/asm/system_misc.h | 2 +
arch/arm64/mm/fault.c | 80 +++++++++--
debian.master/config/config.common.ubuntu | 1 +
drivers/acpi/apei/Kconfig | 15 +++
drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 212
+++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
drivers/acpi/apei/hest.c | 7 +-
drivers/firmware/efi/cper.c | 204
+++++++++++++++++++++++++---
drivers/ras/ras.c | 25 ++++
include/acpi/ghes.h | 48 ++++++-
include/linux/cper.h | 54 ++++++++
include/linux/ras.h | 17 +++
include/ras/ras_event.h | 90 +++++++++++++
include/uapi/linux/uuid.h | 6 +-
19 files changed, 756 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
</blockquote>This is a mix of UEFI and ACPI updates which in my mind should be
separate bug fixes, one for UEFI updates, and one for ACPI since these
are functionally separate.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This was submitted as a patch series to from Tyler, and as a whole enables RAS features in ARM64. But splitting up into different bugs also makes sense if that is easier to parse and track the functionality separately. So there is ACPI, UEFI, and trace functional units which could be separate fixes tracked in separate bugs .</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="plaintext" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">
There are also a considerable amount of changes here plus changes that
affect generic ACPI. Given that these are drawn from linux-next and are
a large set of patches I'm hesitant to ACK these until they have at
least baked in a bit more and landed in Linus' upstream repo rather than
linux-next.
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree based on your and Stephan's review, I have tried to do the due diligence, and make a best effort to meet our obligation with our partners who need this feature at cert. But that said, from our perspective RAS is not essential for cert and so could wait and land at a later date. Let me propose this to them and see what they think. Also, Seth has some comments on this version of patches, were, he wanted the commit messages to say "backported from" for cases where the patches needed some massaging, and also a link to the repo these commits came from. I have a git repo with those changes and was ready to send it your way... looks like now it is a moot point. In case this gets escalated to us, I will re-submit that version for review, although it could still be rejected based on your and Stephan's position on these patches. </div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="plaintext" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">
Colin
</div></blockquote>