Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-55334-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 00:46:39 +0800
From: "Wang, Qingshun" <qingshun.wang@linux.intel.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, 
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com, erwin.tsaur@intel.com, 
	feiting.wanyan@intel.com, qingshun.wang@intel.com, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, 
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, 
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, 
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>, Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>, 
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>, Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>, 
	Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>, 
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, 
	Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>, Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>, 
	Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>, Shiju Jose <shiju.jose@huawei.com>, 
	Adam Preble <adam.c.preble@intel.com>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@nxp.com>, Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>, 
	Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>, Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>, 
	Robert Richter <rrichter@amd.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-edac@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] PCI/AER: Handle Advisory Non-Fatal properly
Message-ID: <ay2cwgycgjfqz5jmteeijgjiuje2u62wozhnkr76ag4tny6vl4@upbmy22y3hcn>
References: <20240125062802.50819-3-qingshun.wang@linux.intel.com>
 <20240205232616.GA831017@bhelgaas>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240205232616.GA831017@bhelgaas>

On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 05:26:16PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> In the subject, "properly" really doesn't convey information.  I think
> this patch does two things:
> 
>   - Prints error bits that might be ANFE 
>   - Clears UNCOR_STATUS bits that were previously not cleared
> 
> Maybe the subject line could say something about those (clearing
> UNCOR_STATUS might be more important, or maybe this could even be
> split into two patches so we could see both).
> 

Good idea, thanks. I think splitting it into two patches would be the
better approach.