linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] EDAC: nuvoton: Add NPCM memory controller driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 14 Apr 2022 12:44:13 +0200
From:   Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Medad Young <medadyoung@...il.com>, rric@...nel.org,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>, tony.luck@...el.com,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Benjamin Fair <benjaminfair@...gle.com>,
        Nancy Yuen <yuenn@...gle.com>,
        Patrick Venture <venture@...gle.com>, KWLIU@...oton.com,
        YSCHU@...oton.com, JJLIU0@...oton.com, KFTING <KFTING@...oton.com>,
        Avi Fishman <avifishman70@...il.com>,
        Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@...il.com>,
        Tali Perry <tali.perry1@...il.com>, ctcchien@...oton.com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] EDAC: nuvoton: Add NPCM memory controller driver

Dear Borislav,


Am 14.04.22 um 12:15 schrieb Borislav Petkov:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 10:56:43AM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
>> No idea, why you had to ask this question, while you statement before
>> already made the point.
> 
> You've told Medad one thing. I told him the complete opposite.

When? I must have missed your comment then?

> Medad as new submitter gets confused. And I don't want patch
> submitters to get confused by review.
> 
> So, if you're unsure about a review feedback, don't give it pls.

Also during review errors can happen, can’t they? I apologized, and then 
you for catching it.

>> Sorry I do not get your point. Would you elaborate on the debug message so
>> it’s more useful?
> 
> Just think of the big picture: is my error message useful enough for
> debugging or would I have to go and add more info to it so that I can
> debug an issue?
> 
> Example:
> 
> There is
> 
> 	edac_dbg(3, "InterruptStatus : 0x%x\n", intr_status);
> 
> now.
> 
> Now, how about this?
> 
>          edac_dbg(3, "dev: %s, id: %s: IRQ: %d, interrupt status: 0x%x\n",
>                   mci->dev_name, mci->ctl_name, irq, intr_status);
> 
> Which one, do you think, is more helpful to a person trying to debug any
> potential issue with the interrupt handler and the ECCs it is supposed
> to issue?

I am all for more elaborate log messages, but have the feeling, you 
think I am not? Where does the misunderstanding come from?


Kind regards,

Paul