[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1285637617.20791.146.camel@yhuang-dev>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 09:33:37 +0800
From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Cc: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 3/7] x86, NMI, Rename memory parity error to PCI
SERR error
On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 00:45 +0800, Robert Richter wrote:
> > > > Ok. I will add CPU ID in message. Because we know the reason, I don't
> > > > think we need the reason in message.
> > >
> > > You only know that bit 7 is set, not the rest. As this is an error
> > > message we should provide as much information as possible.
> >
> > Well, what other info do we know besides that bit being set? (I wish we
> > had more, but I don't think we do)
>
> We should keep printing the reason byte as it did before.
The reason is printed before because mem_parity_error is treated as
something like unknown reason. And iochk_error is treated as known
reason and will not print the reason byte. Please the check the original
code.
But now we treat pci_serr_error (renamed from mem_parity_error) as known
reason. So it is not necessary to print the reason byte. I suggest to
print the reason byte only if (!(reason & 0xc0) && reason), where the
reason is really unknown.
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
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