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, 23 Aug 2019 17:37:39 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
Cc:     Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl>,
        "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] AMD64 EDAC fixes
Message-ID: <20190823153739.GC28379@zn.tnic>
References: <20190821235938.118710-1-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>
 <20190822005020.GA403@angband.pl>
 <SN6PR12MB2639CD6D755B6FFCF5C4B756F8A50@SN6PR12MB2639.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
 <SN6PR12MB263989CCDCC0F74138B6B747F8A40@SN6PR12MB2639.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <SN6PR12MB263989CCDCC0F74138B6B747F8A40@SN6PR12MB2639.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 03:28:59PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> Boris, Do you think it'd be appropriate to change the return values
> for some cases?
>
> For example, ECC disabled is a hardware configuration. This doesn't
> mean that the module failed any operations in this case.
>
> In other words, the module checks for a feature. If the feature is not
> present, then return without failure (and maybe give a message).

That makes sense but AFAICT if probe_one_instance() sees that ECC is not
enabled, it returns 0.

The "if (!edac_has_mcs())" check later is to verify that at least once
instance was loaded successfully and, if not, then return an error.

So where does it return failure?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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