From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A849C2BA83 for ; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:05:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DB8E20873 for ; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:05:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b="Yi0s3b6s" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728941AbgBNJFo (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Feb 2020 04:05:44 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:35912 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726179AbgBNJFo (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Feb 2020 04:05:44 -0500 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300EC2F0D5A00F0C2F03C7F1C4548.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0d:5a00:f0c2:f03c:7f1c:4548]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id A4A821EC0570; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 10:05:42 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1581671142; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=5j3ZjigwZ3zGXN14rYl0tUEzvt2zvOdTA+Q2q/hVZ4M=; b=Yi0s3b6sgjbqizw1/UtzB9JEUktNWqOCShbVh5RnH/3pZDhOwLs6TYkU0h2dMtkBauYLKN 6uY5bo/IuXywdXg94fDEINl8hXjF1NIFA9zAUBTuaS9n0KC8VokgHEFpzIFEpxvf5lEzVH 6mfUM2FivlBAzaSSeXL5BHmx14/BF6Q= Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 10:05:38 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Luck, Tony" Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86/mce: Change default mce logger to check mce->handled Message-ID: <20200214090537.GF13395@zn.tnic> References: <20200212204652.1489-1-tony.luck@intel.com> <20200212204652.1489-6-tony.luck@intel.com> <20200213170820.GN31799@zn.tnic> <20200213222750.GC21107@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200213222750.GC21107@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 02:27:50PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote: > That's pretty hard with a chain. I think folks will have a conniptions LOL. And they do already for other things so let's spare them :-) > if we invent an error return from a notifier chain function that means > "Go back and start over". Though if we did it would make the "handled" > field useful for functions that didn't want to redo ... they'd just > check if "their" bit in handled was already set. > > Still, seems like a terrible idea. Yap. > If some driver really wants multiple bites at an error on the > chain it could register more than one handler with different > priorities. In which case we should have "enum" names for the > highest and lowest priorities so such a driver can go "first" > or "last" (though such a thing would be dependent on whether > some other driver was attempting to add a "first" or "last" > entry on the chain). Yap, makes sense. I'm fine with us even having a possible way to do this, *if* someone decides she wants it. Ok, thanks! -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette