From: Arthur Jones <[email protected]>
Applied to linux-2.6.26-rc5-mm3
Patch file for the i5100_edac module
Explicitly unmask ECC errors we are interested in reporting.
Signed-off-by: Arthur Jones <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Doug Thompson <[email protected]>
---
drivers/edac/i5100_edac.c | 6 ++++++
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.26-rc5/drivers/edac/i5100_edac.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.26-rc5.orig/drivers/edac/i5100_edac.c
+++ linux-2.6.26-rc5/drivers/edac/i5100_edac.c
@@ -75,6 +75,7 @@
#define I5100_FERR_NF_MEM_ANY(a) ((a) & I5100_FERR_NF_MEM_ANY_MASK)
#define I5100_NERR_NF_MEM 0xa4 /* MC Next Non-Fatal Errors */
#define I5100_NERR_NF_MEM_ANY(a) I5100_FERR_NF_MEM_ANY(a)
+#define I5100_EMASK_MEM 0xa8 /* MC Error Mask Register */
/* device 21 and 22, func 0 */
#define I5100_MTR_0 0x154 /* Memory Technology Registers 0-3 */
@@ -709,6 +710,11 @@ static int __devinit i5100_init_one(stru
goto bail;
}
+ /* enable error reporting... */
+ pci_read_config_dword(pdev, I5100_EMASK_MEM, &dw);
+ dw &= ~I5100_FERR_NF_MEM_ANY_MASK;
+ pci_write_config_dword(pdev, I5100_EMASK_MEM, dw);
+
/* device 21, func 0, Channel 0 Memory Map, Error Flag/Mask, etc... */
ch0mm = pci_get_device_func(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,
PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5100_21, 0);
So... is there any reason why we shouldn't fold patches 2, 3 and 4 into #1?
--- Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> So... is there any reason why we shouldn't fold patches 2, 3 and 4 into #1?
>
I pondered that myself. I suppose since it is a new driver, then those mods could be folded in. I
got the original sometime ago and received the updates over time, as I let it stew for awhile,
expecting some updates.
They could be folded together, yes
doug t
W1DUG