[v3,0/2] Update mce_record tracepoint

Message

Avadhut Naik Jan. 26, 2024, 7:57 a.m. UTC

This patchset updates the mce_record tracepoint so that the recently added
fields of struct mce are exported through it to userspace.

The first patch adds PPIN (Protected Processor Inventory Number) field to
the tracepoint.

The second patch adds the microcode field (Microcode Revision) to the
tracepoint.

Changes in v2:
 - Export microcode field (Microcode Revision) through the tracepoiont in
   addition to PPIN.

Changes in v3:
 - Change format specifier for microcode revision from %u to %x
 - Fix tab alignments
 - Add Reviewed-by: Sohil Mehta <[e-mail]>

Avadhut Naik (2):
  tracing: Include PPIN in mce_record tracepoint
  tracing: Include Microcode Revision in mce_record tracepoint

 include/trace/events/mce.h | 10 ++++++++--
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)


base-commit: 0d4f19418f067465b0a84a287d9a51e443a0bc3a

Comments

Steven Rostedt Feb. 8, 2024, 5:10 p.m. UTC | #1

On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 01:57:58 -0600
Avadhut Naik <[e-mail]> wrote:

> This patchset updates the mce_record tracepoint so that the recently added
> fields of struct mce are exported through it to userspace.
> 
> The first patch adds PPIN (Protected Processor Inventory Number) field to
> the tracepoint.
> 
> The second patch adds the microcode field (Microcode Revision) to the
> tracepoint.

From a tracing POV only:

Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[e-mail]>

-- Steve

Naik, Avadhut March 25, 2024, 8:12 p.m. UTC | #2

Hi Boris,

Can this patchset be merged in? Or would you prefer me sending out another
revision with Steven's "Reviewed-by:" tag?

On 2/8/2024 11:10, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 01:57:58 -0600
> Avadhut Naik <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> This patchset updates the mce_record tracepoint so that the recently added
>> fields of struct mce are exported through it to userspace.
>>
>> The first patch adds PPIN (Protected Processor Inventory Number) field to
>> the tracepoint.
>>
>> The second patch adds the microcode field (Microcode Revision) to the
>> tracepoint.
> 
> From a tracing POV only:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[e-mail]>
> 
> -- Steve

Borislav Petkov March 25, 2024, 8:31 p.m. UTC | #3

On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:12:14PM -0500, Naik, Avadhut wrote:
> Can this patchset be merged in? Or would you prefer me sending out
> another revision with Steven's "Reviewed-by:" tag?

First of all, please do not top-post.

Then, you were on Cc on the previous thread. Please summarize from it
and put in the commit message *why* it is good to have each field added.

And then, above the tracepoint, I'd like you to add a rule which
states what information can and should be added to the tracepoint. And
no, "just because" is not good enough. The previous thread has hints.

Thx.

Naik, Avadhut March 25, 2024, 9:39 p.m. UTC | #4

On 3/25/2024 15:31, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:12:14PM -0500, Naik, Avadhut wrote:
>> Can this patchset be merged in? Or would you prefer me sending out
>> another revision with Steven's "Reviewed-by:" tag?
> 
> First of all, please do not top-post.
>
Apologies for that!
 
> Then, you were on Cc on the previous thread. Please summarize from it
> and put in the commit message *why* it is good to have each field added.
> 
> And then, above the tracepoint, I'd like you to add a rule which
> states what information can and should be added to the tracepoint. And
> no, "just because" is not good enough. The previous thread has hints.
> 

Thanks for the clarification! Will update accordingly.

> Thx.
>