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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 710DFC2D0A8 for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 14:05:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECDA22223E for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 14:05:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b="BNmI2iEv" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726634AbgIWOFV (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 10:05:21 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:33768 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726572AbgIWOFV (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 10:05:21 -0400 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f0d13003cb05fb00c1da4a2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0d:1300:3cb0:5fb0:c1d:a4a2]) (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 46B171EC0409; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 16:05:19 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1600869919; 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=6HuhANw8kbWERcNW/iYnFeMlMcA2HBN5jS0VRKC6GY0=; b=BNmI2iEv7W8wMHaxMaIsoNNrU2ow8f9CCZwlYDC4adBakZBU8UcRXV8R7oTeLatu2gHkFi XTfrEyMzKDNc3ZfWwjLHwKEIm5KYhCoMrwXDTFJa/W6ErpvFgYVRkZAGqCAfkXBLpvJrjV UyMOQmGfjVvmsUWt81zcy9qHqKndi5Y= Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 16:05:12 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Punit Agrawal Cc: Smita Koralahalli , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, devel@acpica.org, Tony Luck , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , Ard Biesheuvel , Yazen Ghannam Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] cper, apei, mce: Pass x86 CPER through the MCA handling chain Message-ID: <20200923140512.GJ28545@zn.tnic> References: <20200904140444.161291-1-Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com> <87wo0kiz6y.fsf@kokedama.swc.toshiba.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87wo0kiz6y.fsf@kokedama.swc.toshiba.co.jp> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-edac@vger.kernel.org Smita, pls sync the time of the box where you create the patch: Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 09:04:44 -0500 but your mail headers have: Received: from ... with mapi id 15.20.3370.019; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 14:49:12 +0000 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 07:07:17PM +0900, Punit Agrawal wrote: > I know Boris asked you to add the reason for the Reported-by, but > usually we don't track version differences in the committed patch. > > Boris, can you confirm if you want the Reported-by to be retained? How else would you explain what the Reported-by: tag is for on a patch which adds a feature? > > + * The first expected register in the register layout of MCAX address space. > > + * The address defined must match with the first MSR address extracted from > > + * BERT which in SMCA systems is the bank's MCA_STATUS register. > > + * > > + * Note that the decoding of the raw MSR values in BERT is implementation > > + * specific and follows register offset order of MCAX address space. > > + */ > > +#define MASK_MCA_STATUS 0xC0002001 > > The macro value is already defined in mce.h as > MSR_AMD64_SMCA_MC0_STATUS. Is there any reason to not use it? Good point. > You can move the comment to where you check the status register. No need if he really wants to use the first MCi_STATUS address. > > + m.apicid = lapic_id; > > + m.bank = (ctx_info->msr_addr >> 4) & 0xFF; > > + m.status = *i_mce; > > + m.addr = *(i_mce + 1); > > + m.misc = *(i_mce + 2); > > + /* Skipping MCA_CONFIG */ > > + m.ipid = *(i_mce + 4); > > + m.synd = *(i_mce + 5); > > Instead of using the raw pointer arithmetic, it is better to define a > structure for the MCA registers? Something like - > > struct { > u64 addr; > u64 misc; > u64 config; > u64 ipid; > ... > } > > Checking back, this was mentioned in the previous review comments as > well. Please address all comments before posting a new version - either > by following the suggestion or explaining why it is not a good idea. Well, that was addressed in his reply last time: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/a28aa613-8353-0052-31f6-34bc733abf59@amd.com You might've missed it because you weren't CCed directly. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette