linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] aerdrv: Move cper_print

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 09 May 2013 21:24:12 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	"Ortiz, Lance E" <lance.oritz@...com>
Cc:	"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"lance_ortiz@...mail.com" <lance_ortiz@...mail.com>,
	"jiang.liu@...wei.com" <jiang.liu@...wei.com>,
	"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
	"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	"mchehab@...hat.com" <mchehab@...hat.com>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] aerdrv: Move cper_print_pcie() out of interrupt context

On Thursday, May 09, 2013 07:10:36 PM Ortiz, Lance E wrote:
> Rafael,  
> 
> Thanks for your feedback.
> 
> > The way the changes are described here isn't particularly clear to me.
> 
> I will try to make it a little more clear.

Cool, thanks!

> > Also, since aer_recover_work_func() is going to be the only existing
> > caller of
> > cper_print_aer() after this change, as far as I can say, and it doesn't
> > use the
> > function's first argument, that argument should be dropped entirely.
> 
> The truth is, the function cper_print_aer() really needs to be re-written so
> it is consistent with aer_print_error() in how it outputs information.
> Right now, the output is formatted very differently.  I was planning on doing
> that at a later date, but fix the warning now.  I might add a TODO comment in
> the code for this.

Yes, I think that would be OK, depending on the amount of changes actually
needed to rework it (if that's not too much, I'd just go straight for the
rework, honestly).

> The reason I did not remove the argument in cper_print_aer() is because
> 'prefix' is used in the call to cper_print_bits(), and I passed through an
> empty string to make sure that function worked correctly.  I can try to clean
> it up.

Please do.

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/