[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110617165955.GG20010@aftab>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:59:55 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
To: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] x86, mce: introduce mce_memory_failure_process()
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 04:46:46AM -0400, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> And relocate related functions to near by mce_ring* routines.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> index 0424299..a118496 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> @@ -395,6 +395,8 @@ static inline void mce_gather_info(struct mce *m, struct pt_regs *regs)
> }
>
> /*
> + * mce_ring, mce_memory_failure: Support for Memory errors
> + *
> * Simple lockless ring to communicate PFNs from the exception handler with the
> * process context work function. This is vastly simplified because there's
> * only a single reader and a single writer.
> @@ -449,6 +451,20 @@ static int mce_ring_add(unsigned long pfn)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +/* dummy to break dependency. actual code is in mm/memory-failure.c */
> +void __attribute__((weak)) memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int vector)
> +{
> + pr_err("Action optional memory failure at %lx ignored\n", pfn);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void mce_memory_failure_process(void)
> +{
> + unsigned long pfn;
> +
> + while (mce_ring_get(&pfn))
> + memory_failure(pfn, MCE_VECTOR);
> +}
> +
Frankly, I don't see the need to carve out two lines of code into a
function to avoid duplication and causing needless churn for this.
Just do the
while (..)
memory_failure(..)
in the next patch and that's it. mce.c is already cluttered with too
much stuff anyway.
> static int mce_available(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> {
> if (mce_disabled)
> @@ -1049,12 +1065,6 @@ out:
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(do_machine_check);
>
> -/* dummy to break dependency. actual code is in mm/memory-failure.c */
> -void __attribute__((weak)) memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int vector)
> -{
> - printk(KERN_ERR "Action optional memory failure at %lx ignored\n", pfn);
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Called after mce notification in process context. This code
> * is allowed to sleep. Call the high level VM handler to process
> @@ -1068,10 +1078,8 @@ void __attribute__((weak)) memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int vector)
> */
> void mce_notify_process(void)
> {
> - unsigned long pfn;
> mce_notify_irq();
> - while (mce_ring_get(&pfn))
> - memory_failure(pfn, MCE_VECTOR);
> + mce_memory_failure_process();
> }
>
> static void mce_process_work(struct work_struct *dummy)
> --
> 1.7.1
>
>
>
--
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@...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