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=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 320DCC3A5A6 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:22:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C9323403 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:22:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b="pgjmhZuw" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726214AbfH2JWs (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Aug 2019 05:22:48 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:56164 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725782AbfH2JWs (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Aug 2019 05:22:48 -0400 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300EC2F0D0C00346F303E69D456DB.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0d:c00:346f:303e:69d4:56db]) (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 E43EC1EC0BFD; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:22:45 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1567070566; 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=Q98Y/OGa51WnkiBTuk9hX1WNikpgq22MKUdtW3DJCMQ=; b=pgjmhZuwB6TJ8lpOMTQruGSANaY21h9eDSnRIayH73ydLm+Dbo/C2Xk+vfM1dUIFVthHwA kVGdW57HcZfOOfzOvnugBsG96/I7M0Su7bXMTmUKd0HiR+5jvAIbbABSfeXwV8CVZlQAQz 6h0N7HREB7eM7Rur3EpzPsyCmcsoxeE= Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:22:41 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Ghannam, Yazen" Cc: "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 08/10] EDAC/amd64: Gather hardware information early Message-ID: <20190829092241.GB1312@zn.tnic> References: <20190821235938.118710-1-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com> <20190821235938.118710-9-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190821235938.118710-9-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com> 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 Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 12:00:02AM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > From: Yazen Ghannam > > Split out gathering hardware information from init_one_instance() into a > separate function get_hardware_info(). > > This is necessary so that the information can be cached earlier and used > to check if memory is populated and if ECC is enabled on a node. > > Signed-off-by: Yazen Ghannam > --- > drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c b/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c > index 4d1e6daa7ec4..84832771dec0 100644 > --- a/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c > +++ b/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c > @@ -3405,34 +3405,17 @@ static void compute_num_umcs(void) > edac_dbg(1, "Number of UMCs: %x", num_umcs); > } > > -static int init_one_instance(unsigned int nid) > +static int get_hardware_info(struct amd64_pvt *pvt, > + struct amd64_family_type *fam_type) > { > - struct pci_dev *F3 = node_to_amd_nb(nid)->misc; > - struct amd64_family_type *fam_type = NULL; > - struct mem_ctl_info *mci = NULL; > - struct edac_mc_layer layers[2]; > - struct amd64_pvt *pvt = NULL; > u16 pci_id1, pci_id2; > - int err = 0, ret; > - > - ret = -ENOMEM; > - pvt = kzalloc(sizeof(struct amd64_pvt), GFP_KERNEL); > - if (!pvt) > - goto err_ret; > - > - pvt->mc_node_id = nid; > - pvt->F3 = F3; > - > - ret = -EINVAL; > - fam_type = per_family_init(pvt); > - if (!fam_type) > - goto err_free; > + int ret = -EINVAL; > > if (pvt->fam >= 0x17) { > pvt->umc = kcalloc(num_umcs, sizeof(struct amd64_umc), GFP_KERNEL); Yeah, a get_hardware_info() function which does an allocation of that struct amd64_umc on => F17 which is only 20 bytes. Just add it into the pvt struct: struct amd64_pvt { ... struct amd64_umc umc; /* UMC registers */ }; and be done with it. This should simplify the code flow here a bit and 20 bytes more per pvt is not a big deal. And I know we do test "if (pvt->umc)" in a bunch of places but that can be replaced with a "if (pvt->fam >= 0x17)" test which is equivalent. And that conversion should be a single patch. > if (!pvt->umc) { > ret = -ENOMEM; > - goto err_free; > + goto err_ret; > } > > pci_id1 = fam_type->f0_id; > @@ -3442,18 +3425,34 @@ static int init_one_instance(unsigned int nid) > pci_id2 = fam_type->f2_id; > } > > - err = reserve_mc_sibling_devs(pvt, pci_id1, pci_id2); > - if (err) > + ret = reserve_mc_sibling_devs(pvt, pci_id1, pci_id2); > + if (ret) > goto err_post_init; > > read_mc_regs(pvt); > > + return 0; > + > +err_post_init: > + if (pvt->fam >= 0x17) > + kfree(pvt->umc); > + > +err_ret: > + return ret; > +} > + > +static int init_one_instance(struct amd64_pvt *pvt, > + struct amd64_family_type *fam_type) Yeah, that fam_type can be made global. No need to hand it around in functions since it is going to be a single struct per system. Do that in another, separate patch please. After you've done those things, this patch would become a lot simpler. Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.