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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham 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 8498DC04AB4 for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 18:06:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5569D2168B for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 18:06:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727585AbfEQSGK (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 May 2019 14:06:10 -0400 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:46547 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727063AbfEQSGK (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 May 2019 14:06:10 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 May 2019 11:06:09 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from agluck-desk.sc.intel.com (HELO agluck-desk) ([10.3.52.160]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 May 2019 11:06:08 -0700 Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 11:06:07 -0700 From: "Luck, Tony" To: Borislav Petkov Cc: "Ghannam, Yazen" , "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "x86@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] x86/MCE: Save MCA control bits that get set in hardware Message-ID: <20190517180607.GA21710@agluck-desk> References: <20190516172117.GC21857@zn.tnic> <20190516203456.GD21857@zn.tnic> <20190516205943.GA3299@agluck-desk> <20190517101006.GA32065@zn.tnic> <20190517163729.GE13482@zn.tnic> <20190517172648.GA18164@agluck-desk> <20190517174817.GG13482@zn.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190517174817.GG13482@zn.tnic> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-edac-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-edac@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 07:48:17PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > @@ -1562,15 +1567,21 @@ static void __mcheck_cpu_init_generic(void) > static void __mcheck_cpu_init_clear_banks(void) > { > struct mce_bank *mce_banks = this_cpu_read(mce_banks_array); > + u64 msrval; > int i; > > for (i = 0; i < this_cpu_read(mce_num_banks); i++) { > struct mce_bank *b = &mce_banks[i]; > > - if (!b->init) > - continue; > - wrmsrl(msr_ops.ctl(i), b->ctl); > - wrmsrl(msr_ops.status(i), 0); > + if (b->init) { > + /* Check if any bits are implemented in h/w */ > + wrmsrl(msr_ops.ctl(i), b->ctl); > + rdmsrl(msr_ops.ctl(i), msrval); > + > + b->init = !!msrval; > + > + wrmsrl(msr_ops.status(i), 0); > + } > } > } Am I misreading the diff here? It doesn't look like you needed to drop the if (!b->init) continue; and thus end up with that extra level on indent for the rest of the function. -Tony