[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YUyRFl3oc2CwFxZz@zn.tnic>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 16:37:10 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
Cc: Mukul Joshi <mukul.joshi@....com>, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
mchehab@...nel.org, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 2/2] drm/amdgpu: Register MCE notifier for Aldebaran RAS
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 02:29:07PM +0000, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * If the error was generated in UMC_V2, which belongs to GPU UMCs,
> > + * and error occurred in DramECC (Extended error code = 0) then only
> > + * process the error, else bail out.
> > + */
> > + if (!m || !((smca_get_bank_type(m->bank) == SMCA_UMC_V2) &&
> > + (XEC(m->status, 0x1f) == 0x0)))
>
> The MCA_STATUS[ErrorCodeExt] field is bits [21:16], so the mask should be
> 0x3f.
>
> > + return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If it is correctable error, return.
> > + */
> > + if (mce_is_correctable(m))
> > + return NOTIFY_OK;
>
> Shouldn't this be "NOTIFY_DONE" if "don't care" about this error?
I think the logic here is to stop calling any further consumers on the
notify chain because this is a GPU correctable error and they can't do
anything about it anyway, right?
Or am I misreading it?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists