Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
CC:     "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "bp@suse.de" <bp@suse.de>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: Handle varying MCA bank counts
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] x86/mce: Handle varying MCA bank counts
Thread-Index: AQHUJfJxiibkEK2MV0iFZNwSlQkDKqSjoNMAgAdsq6A=
Date:   Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:40:59 +0000
Message-ID: <CY4PR12MB1557FDF59F92E81601BD7E10F82D0@CY4PR12MB1557.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20180727214009.78289-1-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
 <20180727220833.GA30752@agluck-desk>
In-Reply-To: <20180727220833.GA30752@agluck-desk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: amd.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 17f03ce2-51ff-423e-1836-08d5f7c52e36
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Aug 2018 15:40:59.7926
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 3dd8961f-e488-4e60-8e11-a82d994e183d
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR12MB1528
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 5:09 PM
> To: Ghannam, Yazen <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
> Cc: linux-edac@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; bp@suse.de;
> x86@kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Handle varying MCA bank counts
>=20
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 04:40:09PM -0500, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> > -	/* Don't support asymmetric configurations today */
> > -	WARN_ON(mca_cfg.banks !=3D 0 && b !=3D mca_cfg.banks);
> > -	mca_cfg.banks =3D b;
> > +	mca_cfg.banks =3D max(mca_cfg.banks, b);
>=20
> Should we change mca_cfg.banks to be a per-cpu variable?
>=20
> 	DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, mce_num_banks);
>=20
> That would make it easier to make sure the places
> that scan all banks only look at the ones that exist.
>=20

I agree and I'd like to do that in future patches. But it'll require change=
s in
a few other places, and possibly breaking more assumptions in the code.

I'd like to address this issue in a smaller patch and submit it to the stab=
le
branches. And we can redo things as per_cpu going forward.

Thanks,
Yazen