[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090409071413.GD14687@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 09:14:13 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, ying.huang@...el.com,
hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [3/4] x86: MCE: Improve mce_get_rip
On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 01:59:32PM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> >> I guess it would make much sense if we stop mixing RIP and EIP and rename
> >> the mce_get_rip() to mce_get_eip(), and the rip_msr to eip_msr too.
> >
> > Ok fair enough. I admit the code was always a bit dubious.
> >
> >> And then it would be acceptable if we print RIP with "!INEXACT!" annotation
> >> instead of printing precise EIP in case of RIPV=0 but EIPV=1.
> >
> > Please send a patch to do all that.
>
> I will.
>
> A trivial question is if you unified 32/64bit mce codes, would you
> like to print only "IP %02x:<%016Lx>", or "RIP ..." and "EIP ..." ?
I would prefer to pt in RIP in both cases, simply because i fear breaking
parsers. I think the 32bit users will survive if their instruction
pointer is reported as "RIP" too.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists