coding_style: Add more guidelines on error handling, die() and assert()

This patch adds a new section to the coding style which codifies
existing practices about how to handle errors and how to use the die()
and assert() macros. Also clean up some references to Linux-specific
facilities that do not exist in coreboot in the adjacent function return
type guidelines, and add a small blurb of documentation to the
definition of the assert() macro itself.

Signed-off-by: Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org>
Change-Id: Ice37ed9f995a56d69476e95a352209041b337284
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/70775
Reviewed-by: Elyes Haouas <ehaouas@noos.fr>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin L Roth <gaumless@gmail.com>

1 files changed, 74 insertions, 11 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/contributing/coding_style.md b/Documentation/contributing/coding_style.md
index 6bf530de20..5b2919e3ce 100644
--- a/Documentation/contributing/coding_style.md
+++ b/Documentation/contributing/coding_style.md
@@ -818,9 +818,9 @@ Function return values and names
 
 Functions can return values of many different kinds, and one of the most
 common is a value indicating whether the function succeeded or failed.
-Such a value can be represented as an error-code integer (-Exxx =
-failure, 0 = success) or a "succeeded" boolean (0 = failure, non-zero
-= success).
+Such a value can be represented as an error-code integer (`CB_ERR_xxx`
+(negative number) = failure, `CB_SUCCESS` (0) = success) or a "succeeded"
+boolean (0 = failure, non-zero = success).
 
 Mixing up these two sorts of representations is a fertile source of
 difficult-to-find bugs. If the C language included a strong distinction
@@ -832,21 +832,84 @@ If the name of a function is an action or an imperative command,
 the function should return an error-code integer.  If the name
 is a predicate, the function should return a "succeeded" boolean.
 
-For example, "add work" is a command, and the add_work() function
-returns 0 for success or -EBUSY for failure. In the same way, "PCI
-device present" is a predicate, and the pci_dev_present() function
+For example, "add work" is a command, and the `add_work()` function
+returns 0 for success or `CB_ERR` for failure. In the same way, "PCI
+device present" is a predicate, and the `pci_dev_present()` function
 returns 1 if it succeeds in finding a matching device or 0 if it
 doesn't.
 
-All EXPORTed functions must respect this convention, and so should all
-public functions. Private (static) functions need not, but it is
-recommended that they do.
-
 Functions whose return value is the actual result of a computation,
 rather than an indication of whether the computation succeeded, are not
 subject to this rule. Generally they indicate failure by returning some
 out-of-range result. Typical examples would be functions that return
-pointers; they use NULL or the ERR_PTR mechanism to report failure.
+pointers; they use NULL to report failure.
+
+Error handling, assertions and die()
+-----------------------------
+
+As firmware, coreboot has no means to let the user interactively fix things when
+something goes wrong. We either succeed to boot or the device becomes a brick
+that must be recovered through complicated external means (e.g. a flash
+programmer). Therefore, coreboot code should strive to continue booting
+wherever possible.
+
+In most cases, errors should be handled by logging a message of at least
+`BIOS_ERR` level, returning out of the function stack for the failed feature,
+and then continuing execution. For example, if a function reading the EDID of an
+eDP display panel encounters an I2C error, it should print a "cannot read EDID"
+message and return an error code. The calling display initialization function
+knows that without the EDID there is no way to initialize the display correctly,
+so it will also immediately return with an error code without running its
+remaining code that would initialize the SoC's display controller. Exeuction
+returns further up the function stack to the mainboard initialization code
+which continues booting despite the failed display initialization, since
+display functionality is non-essential to the system. (Code is encouraged but
+not required to use `enum cb_err` error codes to return these errors.)
+
+coreboot also has the `die()` function that completely halts execution. `die()`
+should only be used as a last resort, since it results in the worst user
+experience (bricked system). It is generally preferrable to continue executing
+even after a problem was encountered that might be fatal (e.g. SPI clock
+couldn't be configured correctly), because a slight chance of successfully
+booting is still better than not booting at all. The only cases where `die()`
+should be used are:
+
+1. There is no (simple) way to continue executing. For example, when loading the
+   next stage from SPI flash fails, we don't have any more code to execute. When
+   memory initialization fails, we have no space to load the ramstage into.
+
+2. Continuing execution would pose a security risk. All security features in
+   coreboot are optional, but when they are configured in the user must be able
+   to rely on them. For example, if CBFS verification is enabled and the file
+   hash when loading the romstage doesn't match what it should be, it is better
+   to stop execution than to jump to potentially malicious code.
+
+In addition to normal error logging with `printk()`, coreboot also offers the
+`assert()` macro. `assert()` should be used judiciously to confirm that
+conditions are true which the programmer _knows_ to be true, in order to catch
+programming errors and incorrect assumptions. It is therefore different from a
+normal `if ()`-check that is used to actually test for things which may turn
+out to be true or false based on external conditions. For example, anything
+that involves communicating with hardware, such as whether an attempt to read
+from SPI flash succeeded, should _not_ use `assert()` and should instead just
+be checked with a normal `if ()` and subsequent manual error handling. Hardware
+can always fail for various reasons and the programmer can never 100% assume in
+advance that it will work as expected. On the other hand, if a function takes a
+pointer parameter `ctx` and the contract for that function (as documented in a
+comment above its declaration) specifies that this parameter should point to a
+valid context structure, then adding an `assert(ctx)` line to that function may
+be a good idea. The programmer knows that this function should never be called
+with a NULL pointer (because that's how it is specified), and if it was actually
+called with a NULL pointer that would indicate a programming error on account of
+the caller.
+
+`assert()` can be configured to either just print an error message and continue
+execution (default), or call `die()` (when `CONFIG_FATAL_ASSERTS` is set).
+Developers are encouraged to always test their code with this option enabled to
+make assertion errors (and therefore bugs) more easy to notice. Since assertions
+thus do not always stop execution, they should never be relied upon to be the
+sole guard against conditions that really _need_ to stop execution (e.g.
+security guarantees should never be enforced only by `assert()`).
 
 Headers and includes
 ---------------