[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240214182953.GMZc0GofSSQxd3T5-N@fat_crate.local>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 19:29:53 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
Cc: tony.luck@...el.com, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, avadhut.naik@....com,
john.allen@....com, muralidhara.mk@....com,
naveenkrishna.chatradhi@....com, sathyapriya.k@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] RAS: Introduce the FRU Memory Poison Manager
On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 09:46:46AM -0500, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> > This is a generic thing and thus can't use an x86-ism struct mce,
> > remember?
> >
>
> Yep, that's one of the assumptions/limitations I highlighted.
Right, since the notifier callback fru_mem_poison_nb is on the x86 MCE
chain and since we're making this thing depend on AMD_ATL which depends
on X86_64 currently, it is ok to have struct mce in there.
Once something else outside of x86 wants to use it, it'll have to be
decoupled and use atl_err.
Later...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists