[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <df4b694601a947d5b6f3d87c5d776807@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 21:16:58 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>,
Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <nchatrad@....com>,
"Zhuo, Qiuxu" <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>
CC: "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"mchehab@...nel.org" <mchehab@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/7] EDAC/mc: Add new HBM2 memory type
> The following commit added HBM support to some Intel EDAC code.
>
> c945088384d0 EDAC/i10nm: Add support for high bandwidth memory
>
> But it didn't include a new mem_type for HBM. Should it have?
>
> I only see some edac_mem_types use in sysfs and some debug messages. So
> I'm curious if users find this information useful.
Yazen,
That commit makes the normal vs. HBM error visible in the DIMM label (by
prefixing the "MC" for memory controller with "HB".
+ if (imc->hbm_mc)
+ snprintf(dimm->label, sizeof(dimm->label), "CPU_SrcID#%u_HBMC#%u_Chan#%u",
+ imc->src_id, imc->lmc, chan);
+ else
+ snprintf(dimm->label, sizeof(dimm->label), "CPU_SrcID#%u_MC#%u_Chan#%u_DIMM#%u",
+ imc->src_id, imc->lmc, chan, dimmno);
Perhaps we should also set the "type" of the DIMMs. Qiuxu: opinion?
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists