[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <61a28ed0-d498-23b5-902a-0b96eec0e24b@molgen.mpg.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 11:55:41 +0100
From: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Cc: Alexander Alemayhu <alexander@...mayhu.com>,
Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ra.org>, tony.luck@...el.com,
linux@...mhuis.info, len.brown@...el.com,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Pandruvada, Srinivas" <srinivas.pandruvada@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Dell XPS13: MCE (Hardware Error) reported
On 01/06/17 17:54, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 07:58:31AM -0800, Raj, Ashok wrote:
>> Looks like we don't need a return value from therm_throt_process(),
>> we can fix that as void as well.
>
> Right you are, here's v2:
>
> ---
> From a8151fa6f18c2605eb7972061234f05e79b372c4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 12:07:08 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] x86/MCE/therm_throt: Do not log a fake MCE for a thermal event
>
> We log a fake bank 128 MCE to note that we're handling a CPU thermal
> event. However, this confuses people into thinking that their hardware
> generates MCEs. Hijacking MCA for logging thermal events is a gross
> misuse anyway and it should've been done in the first place. And besides
Do you mean *shouldn’t have been done*?
> we have other means for dealing with thermal events which are much more
> suitable.
>
> So let's kill the MCE logging part.
>
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Should the discussion be referenced?
Also, is that just for MacBookPro11,3? The MCE for the Dell XPS13 looks
different from what I see, doesn’t it?
[…]
Kind regards,
Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists