linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: SRAT: report non-volatile memory in debug

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

Message-ID: <1357691375.1890.16.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Date:	Tue, 08 Jan 2013 16:29:35 -0800
From:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: SRAT: report non-volatile memory in debug

On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 01:34 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 04:15:56 PM Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > Just as with the other memory affinity flags, report
> > non-volatile memory with ACPI debug.
> 
> Looks kind of good, but ->
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/acpi/numa.c | 4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/numa.c b/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > index cb31298..68077ac 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > @@ -116,12 +116,14 @@ acpi_table_print_srat_entry(struct acpi_subtable_header *header)
> >  			struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *p =
> >  			    (struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *)header;
> >  			ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT((ACPI_DB_INFO,
> > -					  "SRAT Memory (0x%lx length 0x%lx) in proximity domain %d %s%s\n",
> > +					  "SRAT Memory (0x%lx length 0x%lx) in proximity domain %d %s%s%s\n",
> >  					  (unsigned long)p->base_address,
> >  					  (unsigned long)p->length,
> >  					  p->proximity_domain,
> >  					  (p->flags & ACPI_SRAT_MEM_ENABLED)?
> >  					  "enabled" : "disabled",
> > +					  (p->flags & ACPI_SRAT_MEM_NON_VOLATILE)?
> > +					  " non-volatile" : "",
> 
> -> why did you put non-volatile before hot-pluggable?

No particular reason. Should I send a v2 with non-volatile at the end?

> 
> >  					  (p->flags & ACPI_SRAT_MEM_HOT_PLUGGABLE)?
> >  					  " hot-pluggable" : ""));
> >  		}
> 
> Rafael
> 
> 


--
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/