[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <542EB53E.30507@amd.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 09:39:58 -0500
From: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
<tglx@...utronix.de>, <hpa@...or.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
<bp@...e.de>, <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
<dougthompson@...ssion.com>, <m.chehab@...sung.com>,
<linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] edac, amd64_edac: Add F15h M60h support
On 10/1/2014 10:45 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 10:32:58AM -0500, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
>>>> + if (dcsm & 0x3) {
>>>> + /* LRDIMMs */
>>>> + edac_dbg(1, " DIMM type: LRDIMM %dx rank multiply;"
>>>> + "CS = %d; all DIMMs support ECC: %s\n",
>>>> + (dcsm & 0x3), cs,
>>>> + (dclr & BIT(19)) ? "yes" : "no");
>>> Why do we need to iterate over the DRAM CS sets? Just for the rank
>>> multiplier, apparently. We dump those normally in read_dct_base_mask(),
>>> though.
>> It's not just for rank multiplier.. we find that it's LRDIMM only by
>> examining dcsm. Hence the iteration here..
> So we can look only at the first DCSM, no? Or are there systems with
> different types of LRDIMMs on one DCT?
>
So it seems we can theoretically have systems in this manner, but that
is not a common case..
So, shall I just use first DCSM to keep it simple for now?
And find rank multiplier iteratively as and when need arises?
Thanks,
-Aravind.
--
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