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;
Date:   Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:28:16 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc:     Lei Wang <lewan@microsoft.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Sinan Kaya <okaya@kernel.org>,
        Shiping Ji <shiping.linux@gmail.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC/dmc520: Don't print an error for each unconfigured
 interrupt line
Message-ID: <Yeb4sK+ZmSHjWPWL@zn.tnic>
References: <20220111163800.22362-1-tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com>
 <YeRkGvestiloCAUV@zn.tnic>
 <20220118152816.GA89184@sequoia>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220118152816.GA89184@sequoia>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 09:28:16AM -0600, Tyler Hicks wrote:
> KERN_ERR messages trip log scanners and cause concern that the
> kernel/hardware is not configured or working correctly. They also add a
> little big of ongoing stress into kernel maintainer's lives, as we
> prepare and test kernel updates, since they show up as red text in
> journalctl output that we have to think about regularly. Multiple
> KERN_ERR messages, 8 in this case, can also be considered a little worse
> than a single error message.

It sounds to me like you wanna read

Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst

first.

> I feel like this trivial fix is worth taking into stable rather than
> suppressing these errors (mentally and in log scanners) for years.

Years? 

In any case, sorry, no, I don't consider this stable material.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette