[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140825054339.GA13911@nazgul.tnic>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:43:39 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@....com>
Cc: dougthompson@...ssion.com, m.chehab@...sung.com,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] edac, amd64_edac: Modify usage of
amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg()
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:19:46PM -0500, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
> @@ -767,17 +750,25 @@ static void read_dct_base_mask(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
> int reg1 = DCSB1 + (cs * 4);
> u32 *base0 = &pvt->csels[0].csbases[cs];
> u32 *base1 = &pvt->csels[1].csbases[cs];
> + u8 dct = 0;
>
> - if (!amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg(pvt, reg0, base0))
> + if (!amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg(pvt, dct, reg0, base0))
> edac_dbg(0, " DCSB0[%d]=0x%08x reg: F2x%x\n",
> cs, *base0, reg0);
>
> - if (pvt->fam == 0xf || dct_ganging_enabled(pvt))
> + if (pvt->fam == 0xf) {
> continue;
> -
> - if (!amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg(pvt, reg1, base1))
> - edac_dbg(0, " DCSB1[%d]=0x%08x reg: F2x%x\n",
> - cs, *base1, reg1);
> + } else if (pvt->fam == 0x10 && !dct_ganging_enabled(pvt)) {
> + if (!amd64_read_pci_cfg(pvt->F2, reg1, base1))
> + edac_dbg(0, " DCSB1[%d]=0x%08x reg: F2x%x\n",
> + cs, *base1, reg1);
> + } else {
> + dct = ((pvt->fam == 0x15)
> + && (pvt->model == 0x30)) ? 3 : 1;
> + if (!amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg(pvt, dct, reg0, base1))
> + edac_dbg(0, " DCSB1[%d]=0x%08x reg: F2x%x\n",
> + cs, *base1, reg0);
> + }
> }
>
> for_each_chip_select_mask(cs, 0, pvt) {
> @@ -785,17 +776,25 @@ static void read_dct_base_mask(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
> int reg1 = DCSM1 + (cs * 4);
> u32 *mask0 = &pvt->csels[0].csmasks[cs];
> u32 *mask1 = &pvt->csels[1].csmasks[cs];
> + u8 dct = 0;
>
> - if (!amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg(pvt, reg0, mask0))
> + if (!amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg(pvt, dct, reg0, mask0))
> edac_dbg(0, " DCSM0[%d]=0x%08x reg: F2x%x\n",
> cs, *mask0, reg0);
>
> - if (pvt->fam == 0xf || dct_ganging_enabled(pvt))
> + if (pvt->fam == 0xf) {
> continue;
> -
> - if (!amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg(pvt, reg1, mask1))
> - edac_dbg(0, " DCSM1[%d]=0x%08x reg: F2x%x\n",
> - cs, *mask1, reg1);
> + } else if (pvt->fam == 0x10 && !dct_ganging_enabled(pvt)) {
> + if (!amd64_read_pci_cfg(pvt->F2, reg1, mask1))
> + edac_dbg(0, " DCSM1[%d]=0x%08x reg: F2x%x\n",
> + cs, *mask1, reg1);
> + } else {
> + dct = ((pvt->fam == 0x15)
> + && (pvt->model == 0x30)) ? 3 : 1;
> + if (!amd64_read_dct_pci_cfg(pvt, dct, reg0, mask1))
> + edac_dbg(0, " DCSM1[%d]=0x%08x reg: F2x%x\n",
> + cs, *mask1, reg0);
> + }
This is almost unreadable now with all the family checks everywhere.
You need to hide all that per-family logic into the function and have a
single
amd_read_pci_cfg_dct(pvt, dct, ...)
which contains all that logic. Calling code doesn't need to care about
details like on which family it is running, etc, etc.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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