Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200610065846.3626-1-zhenzhong.duan@gmail.com>
 <20200610065846.3626-2-zhenzhong.duan@gmail.com> <20200610171912.GB1474@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200610171912.GB1474@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
From:   Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:37:22 +0800
Message-ID: <CAFH1YnP_nreyKmHOa24d1XkrFECQg3yFjAJ04FJqWub__SjVxg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC/mc: call edac_inc_ue_error() before panic
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        mchehab@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, rrichter@marvell.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 1:19 AM Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 02:58:46PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > By calling edac_inc_ue_error() before panic, we get a correct UE error
> > count for core dump analysis.
>
> Looks accurate, and I'll add the patch to be applied. But I wonder
> how big a problem it is. Isn't most of the information deriveable
> from the panic message?

Thanks for review.
Yes, it's totally not a problem.  I'm a little too strict here.

Zhenzhong