[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1355777940.19706.11.camel@joe-AO722>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:59:00 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@....com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Doug Thompson <dougthompson@...ssion.com>,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] MCE, AMD: Make MC2 decoding part of amd_decoder_ops
as well
On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 14:43 -0600, Jacob Shin wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:40:11PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:34:35PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > decode_mc2_mce does
> > >
> > > pr_emerg(HW_ERR "MC2 Error: ");
> > > calls
> > > fam_ops->mc2_mce()
> > > which may not emit anything
> > > and if it doesn't, does
> > > pr_emerg(HW_ERR "Corrupted ...");
> > > on another line leaving a trailing colon without
> > > newline from the pr_emerg above.
> >
> > Ok, this is in Jacob's patch AFAICT, I'll review those tomorrow but
> > thanks for the heads-up.
>
> Okay, I'll wait until your feedback before sending V2
>
> >
> > > I believe the second pr_emerg should be pr_cont
> >
> > Actually, it should be
> >
> > pr_emerg(HW_ERR "\nCorrupted...\n");
> >
> > to finish the initial pr_emerg.
>
> Okay, all of the other decode_mc*_mce functions needs to change then.
Hi Jacob.
I don't think that's necessary.
Using any pr_<level>("\n...") is just not good form.
I think the pr_cont would be fine, it's the same
form as all the other decoded continuations.
The new pr_emerg is effectively a termination of the
previous one. There's no need for 2 consecutive uses
of pr_emerg(HW_ERR ...) here.
cheers, Joe
--
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