Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753519Ab2H0JMu (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 27 Aug 2012 05:12:50 -0400
Received: from mail.x86-64.org ([217.9.48.20]:59172 "EHLO mail.x86-64.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752968Ab2H0JMt (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 27 Aug 2012 05:12:49 -0400
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 11:12:35 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>
To: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, andi@firstfloor.org, gong.chen@linux.intel.com,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, ananth@in.ibm.com,
        Chris McDermott <lcm@us.ibm.com>, masbock@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: mce: Honour bios-set CMCI threshold
Message-ID: <20120827091235.GB26602@aftab.osrc.amd.com>
References: <20120822123054.29238.3864.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
 <20120822124649.GD5817@aftab.osrc.amd.com>
 <50361A59.2020308@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <50361A59.2020308@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2474
Lines: 84

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 05:26:09PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> Sure - sounds like a good idea. Further, a #define could eliminate
> the need to change other references, but I'm not sure that's
> GENERALLacceptable
>
> #define mce_bios_cmci_threshold boot_flags.mce_bios_cmci_threshold
>
> could eliminate the need to change other references, but I'm not sure
> that's acceptable

Yeah, that's kinda obfuscating it for no reason. As I said before, we
can always add it later if it makes sense.

> But, I just had a quick look and it seems to me that these were
> defined as integers since they are exposed via sysfs. For instance:
> 
> static struct dev_ext_attribute dev_attr_cmci_disabled = {
>         __ATTR(cmci_disabled, 0644, device_show_int, set_cmci_disabled),
>         &mce_cmci_disabled
> };
> 
> Converting mce_cmci_disabled to a bit-field doesn't work since we
> take its address above. We could ignore and not set the second field
> at all (dev_ext_attribute->var) and define our own callbacks, but
> that'll be more work and I'm not sure if we work fine without

Right,

but take a look at set_cmci_disabled(): it converts the newly read value
to bool anyway:

        if (mce_cmci_disabled ^ !!new) {

so we can do later

	flags.mce_cmci_disabled = true;

or
	flags.mce_cmci_disabled = false;

instead of assigning 0 or 1 to it.

And, about showing it with device_show_int, a simple test works:

---
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdbool.h>

int main()
{
        bool a = true;
        printf("%d\n", a);
        return 0;
}
--

but even if there are troubles with that, we can change device_show_int
to a locally defined function.

But, anyway, long story short: I wasn't suggesting you go and change all
of them - simply start by adding your flag mce_bios_cmci_threshold to a
struct <something>_flags and I'll take care of the rest.

Unless you really want to do it, of course :-)

Oh, and the more important thing is, Tony would need to review your
Intel-specific changes so pls keep him CCed on your next iteration too.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/