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;
Date:   Fri, 22 Mar 2019 21:55:00 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
Cc:     "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "rafal@milecki.pl" <rafal@milecki.pl>,
        "clemej@gmail.com" <clemej@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] x86/MCE/AMD: Don't report L1 BTB MCA errors on
 some Family 17h models
Message-ID: <20190322205500.GP12472@zn.tnic>
References: <20190322202848.20749-1-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
 <20190322202848.20749-2-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
 <bbcce693-496e-0ab9-f01e-66bc67347715@amd.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bbcce693-496e-0ab9-f01e-66bc67347715@amd.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 08:37:08PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> Sorry, I forgot to mention this. I went with "filter_mce_amd" because
> amd_filter_mce() is already defined in edac/mce_amd.c and there was
> a conflict when building. Is there another way to avoid these naming
> conflicts?

Yuck, we're clearly filtering too much. :)

So let's rename that amd_filter_mce() to something else since it is
static and only used in that file. Maybe something like

        if (ignore_mce(m))
                return NOTIFY_STOP;

so that we can keep the "filter" notion all reserved to the core MCA
code and there's no confusion.

And then amd_filter_mce() is free to be used in the core code.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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