mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
Cc: "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/mce/AMD: Redo use of SMCA MCA_DE{STAT,ADDR} registers
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 20:22:23 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170405182223.27fzxe27jvinidk6@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BN6PR1201MB013183C5B57F496DD5DA5D9FF80A0@BN6PR1201MB0131.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 05:53:57PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> Correct, but only on SMCA systems.

On !SMCA systems you log only once anyway - you don't have DE* MSRs.

> This works so I don't know why it's not okay.

So I should take the code just because you have found one way that it
works? Screw readability or future proof design - people should dump the
code on maintainers and maintainers should deal with the stinking pile.
Who cares, it works for you.

> Your suggestion also does an SMCA check.

Why TF does that even matter? Enough with the dumb checks argument
already.

> So code that does a check-and-return is preferable to code using
> if/else-if statements? If that's the case then I can try to rework it.

No, readable code matters. Your suggestion is confusing. I see

	if (is_deferred_error(status)) {
		__log_error
	} else if (mce_flags.smca) {
		...
		if (is_deferred_error(status))

But then here --->

we still deal with deferred errors. Even though we did the deferred
check in the if-clause. And that is confusing and makes the code hard to
follow.

My suggestion does *exactly* what the commit message says:

	if (__log_error(..))
		goto out;

when we go to the out label, we know we've succeeded logging the
deferred error and we're done.

        if (!mce_flags.smca)
                return;

When we return here, we know, we've taken care of the !SMCA systems. Now
here starts the second attempt to read the DE* registers and we *know*
we're on SMCA systems.

> How does log_error() know if we can't use the normal MSRs?

MCI_STATUS_VAL.

> We check for MCI_STATUS_VAL in log_error().

Yes.

> We also need to check for MCI_STATUS_DEFERRED but only if we're coming
> from the deferred error handler.

Why? We *are* coming from the #DF handler so are you expecting a
different type of error in the MSRs?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-05 18:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-04 17:24 Yazen Ghannam
2017-04-04 17:24 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/mce/AMD: Carve out SMCA bank configuration Yazen Ghannam
2017-04-05 14:19   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-04-05 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/mce/AMD: Redo use of SMCA MCA_DE{STAT,ADDR} registers Borislav Petkov
2017-04-05 14:52   ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-05 16:44     ` Borislav Petkov
2017-04-05 17:06       ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-05 17:22         ` Borislav Petkov
2017-04-05 17:53           ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-05 18:22             ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2017-04-05 19:29               ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-05 20:04                 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-04-07 20:37                   ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-07 21:35                     ` Borislav Petkov
2017-04-11 12:53                       ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-11 13:12                         ` Borislav Petkov
2017-04-11 13:18                           ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-11 13:24                             ` Borislav Petkov
2017-04-11 13:32                               ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-11 13:35                                 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-04-11 13:50                                   ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-04-11 13:54                                     ` Borislav Petkov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170405182223.27fzxe27jvinidk6@pd.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®