[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181206162703.GA119163@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 17:27:03 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
linux-edac <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Streamline MCE subsystem's naming
* Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 07:01:58PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Oh - I thought we'd have arch/x86/mce/ or so?
> >
> > There's machine check events that are not tied to any particular CPU,
> > correct? So this would be the right conceptual level - and it would also
> > remove the somewhat redundant 'kernel' part.
>
> Well, all the MCE events reported are some way or the other tied to the
> CPU and they're reported in the CPU's MCA banks so I think we want
>
> arch/x86/cpu/mce/
Well, *everything* the kernel does is in some way connected to a CPU,
because we always execute the kernel on a CPU, still we have things like
discrete PMUs and abstractions for other pieces of hardware that are not
per CPU.
So the real question is, is there a signifcant class of MCE events that
are not tied to the reporting channel which is per CPU (-ish ...) MCA
banks?
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists