Hanjun Guo guohanjun at huawei.com
Tue Oct 20 18:55:43 PDT 2015

Hi Boris, Mark,

On 2015/10/21 1:36, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 06:26:55PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> Btw, how much of this is implementing generic A57 functionality?
>> The driver is entirely A57 generic.
>>> If a lot, can we make this a generic a57_edac driver so that multiple
>>> vendors can use it?
>> Yes.
> Ok, cool.
>>> How fast and how ugly can something like that become?
>> Not sure I follow.
> In the sense that some vendor might require just a little bit different
> handling or maybe wants to read some vendor-specific registers in
> addition to the architectural ones.

Yes, you are right and foresight :)

> Then we'll start adding vendor-specific hacks to that generic driver.
> And therefore the question how fast and how ugly such hacks would
> become.
> I guess we'll worry about that when we get there...

So I think the meaning of those error register is the same, but the way
of handle it may different from SoCs, for single bit error:

 - SoC may trigger a interrupt;
 - SoC may just keep silent so we need to scan the registers using poll

For Double bit error:
  - SoC may also keep silent
  - Trigger a interrupt
  - Trigger a SEI (system error)

Any suggestion to cover those cases?


More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list