Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] efi/cper: align ARM CPER type with UEFI 2.9A/2.10 specs

[kernel test robot]

Hi Mauro,

kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:

[auto build test ERROR on efi/next]
[also build test ERROR on rafael-pm/linux-next rafael-pm/bleeding-edge linus/master v6.10-rc5 next-20240626]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]

url:    https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Mauro-Carvalho-Chehab/efi-cper-Adjust-infopfx-size-to-accept-an-extra-space/20240625-203952
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/efi/efi.git next
patch link:    https://lore.kernel.org/r/b9354882f45a0c600e65df4bacee2f1080c4ba89.1719219886.git.mchehab%2Bhuawei%40kernel.org
patch subject: [PATCH v5 3/4] efi/cper: align ARM CPER type with UEFI 2.9A/2.10 specs
config: i386-randconfig-004-20240627 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240627/202406271626.72sHSPJJ-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config)
compiler: clang version 18.1.5 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 617a15a9eac96088ae5e9134248d8236e34b91b1)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240627/202406271626.72sHSPJJ-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/reproduce)

If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202406271626.72sHSPJJ-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

>> drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c:566:6: error: call to undeclared function 'FIELD_GET'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
     566 |                                  FIELD_GET(CPER_ARM_ERR_TYPE_MASK, err_info->type),
         |                                  ^
   1 error generated.


vim +/FIELD_GET +566 drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c

   530	
   531	static bool ghes_handle_arm_hw_error(struct acpi_hest_generic_data *gdata,
   532					       int sev, bool sync)
   533	{
   534		struct cper_sec_proc_arm *err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
   535		int flags = sync ? MF_ACTION_REQUIRED : 0;
   536		char error_type[120];
   537		bool queued = false;
   538		int sec_sev, i;
   539		char *p;
   540	
   541		log_arm_hw_error(err);
   542	
   543		sec_sev = ghes_severity(gdata->error_severity);
   544		if (sev != GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE || sec_sev != GHES_SEV_RECOVERABLE)
   545			return false;
   546	
   547		p = (char *)(err + 1);
   548		for (i = 0; i < err->err_info_num; i++) {
   549			struct cper_arm_err_info *err_info = (struct cper_arm_err_info *)p;
   550			bool is_cache = err_info->type & CPER_ARM_CACHE_ERROR;
   551			bool has_pa = (err_info->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_INFO_VALID_PHYSICAL_ADDR);
   552	
   553			/*
   554			 * The field (err_info->error_info & BIT(26)) is fixed to set to
   555			 * 1 in some old firmware of HiSilicon Kunpeng920. We assume that
   556			 * firmware won't mix corrected errors in an uncorrected section,
   557			 * and don't filter out 'corrected' error here.
   558			 */
   559			if (is_cache && has_pa) {
   560				queued = ghes_do_memory_failure(err_info->physical_fault_addr, flags);
   561				p += err_info->length;
   562				continue;
   563			}
   564	
   565			cper_bits_to_str(error_type, sizeof(error_type),
 > 566					 FIELD_GET(CPER_ARM_ERR_TYPE_MASK, err_info->type),
   567					 cper_proc_error_type_strs,
   568					 ARRAY_SIZE(cper_proc_error_type_strs));
   569	
   570			pr_warn_ratelimited(FW_WARN GHES_PFX
   571					    "Unhandled processor error type 0x%02x: %s%s\n",
   572					    err_info->type, error_type,
   573					    (err_info->type & ~CPER_ARM_ERR_TYPE_MASK) ? " with reserved bit(s)" : "");
   574			p += err_info->length;
   575		}
   576	
   577		return queued;
   578	}
   579	

-- 
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki