From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753774AbdDDNpp (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2017 09:45:45 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:58804 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753135AbdDDNpm (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2017 09:45:42 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 15:45:33 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Ghannam, Yazen" Cc: "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" , Tony Luck , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/mce/AMD: Carve out SMCA bank configuration Message-ID: <20170404134533.ohpdleaczenyilal@pd.tnic> References: <1490210971-62346-1-git-send-email-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com> <1490210971-62346-2-git-send-email-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com> <20170328192303.a732usin3tq6els3@pd.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 01:34:42PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > I'd like to keep the functions separate since they're logically independent. I can > define something like smca_configure() as a wrapper function that can contain > current and future SMCA related functions. Is this okay? Are you planning to call the one and not the other in some path? -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.