[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180419143018.GC3600@pd.tnic>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 16:30:19 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Alex G." <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>
Cc: linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
rjw@...ysocki.net, lenb@...nel.org, tony.luck@...el.com,
tbaicar@...eaurora.org, will.deacon@....com, james.morse@....com,
shiju.jose@...wei.com, zjzhang@...eaurora.org,
gengdongjiu@...wei.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
alex_gagniuc@...lteam.com, austin_bolen@...l.com,
shyam_iyer@...l.com, devel@...ica.org, mchehab@...nel.org,
robert.moore@...el.com, erik.schmauss@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] acpi: apei: Split GHES handlers outside of
ghes_do_proc
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 09:19:03AM -0500, Alex G. wrote:
> On the other side, you lose readability as soon as you get a few more
> handlers and the function becomes too long.
No you don't - you split it properly.
> And more importantly, you lose generality: it's not obvious that
> there's ghes_edac_report_mem_error() which too wide a context.
I don't understand what that means.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists