[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7017c91e-8923-c8d2-26ca-875328ab855a@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 16:13:20 +0100
From: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
To: Robert Richter <rrichter@...vell.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/21] EDAC, ghes: Remove pvt->detail_location string
Hi Robert,
On 29/05/2019 09:44, Robert Richter wrote:
> The detail_location[] string in struct ghes_edac_pvt is complete
> useless and data is just copied around. Put everything into
> e->other_detail from the beginning.
We still print all that complete-useless detail_location stuff... so this commit message
had me confused about what you're doing here. I think you meant the space for the string,
instead of the value!
| detail_location[] is used to collect two location strings so they can be passed as one
| to trace_mc_event(). Instead of having an extra copy step, assemble the location string
| in other_detail[] from the beginning.
> diff --git a/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c b/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
> index 39702bac5eaf..c18f16bc9e4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
> +++ b/drivers/edac/ghes_edac.c
> @@ -23,8 +23,7 @@ struct ghes_edac_pvt {
> struct mem_ctl_info *mci;
>
> /* Buffers for the error handling routine */
> - char detail_location[240];
> - char other_detail[160];
> + char other_detail[400];
> char msg[80];
> };
>
> @@ -225,13 +224,14 @@ void ghes_edac_report_mem_error(int sev, struct cper_sec_mem_err *mem_err)
> memset(e, 0, sizeof (*e));
> e->error_count = 1;
> strcpy(e->label, "unknown label");
> - e->msg = pvt->msg;
> - e->other_detail = pvt->other_detail;
> e->top_layer = -1;
> e->mid_layer = -1;
> e->low_layer = -1;
> - *pvt->other_detail = '\0';
> + e->msg = pvt->msg;
> + e->other_detail = pvt->other_detail;
> +
> *pvt->msg = '\0';
> + *pvt->other_detail = '\0';
... so no change? Could you drop this hunk?
Regardless,
Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Thanks,
James
Powered by blists - more mailing lists