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 96981C4724C for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 18:37:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 786692085B for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 18:37:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b="Loxg7qHf" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726453AbgEDShY (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2020 14:37:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34578 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726111AbgEDShX (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2020 14:37:23 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:190:11c2::b:1457]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43CDEC061A0F; Mon, 4 May 2020 11:37:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zn.tnic (p200300EC2F08AF0065FB624DCF4BA4D3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f08:af00:65fb:624d:cf4b:a4d3]) (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 EC3E21EC02CA; Mon, 4 May 2020 20:37:19 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1588617440; 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=YuW8tb+waz9pfSvMfWhFe9y4ge3JyCySIqtRfEA1Ev8=; b=Loxg7qHfyNd5NlctbHdWyRlUKhl4uMV33Gqbnl6jLD+pV37pY/Z3s97vOjSG0DrJZcSrWC NZZZdI5FefhNTVMEdziALRtWLraKpwHiXKxQSxNrujV9olY0U5AxQM58uFSr0koaRfmiyx xXfDo1hym6MHekNpykIm/9pXyWJlkps= Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 20:37:16 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Shenhar, Talel" Cc: mchehab@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, davem@davemloft.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, nicolas.ferre@microchip.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, dwmw@amazon.co.uk, benh@kernel.crashing.org, hhhawa@amazon.com, ronenk@amazon.com, jonnyc@amazon.com, hanochu@amazon.com, eitan@amazon.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] EDAC: al-mc-edac: Introduce Amazon's Annapurna Labs Memory Controller EDAC Message-ID: <20200504183716.GJ15046@zn.tnic> References: <20200224134132.23924-1-talel@amazon.com> <20200224134132.23924-3-talel@amazon.com> <20200428113950.GB11272@zn.tnic> <46ccdb47-f28d-63f7-e759-1ba34e98add8@amazon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46ccdb47-f28d-63f7-e759-1ba34e98add8@amazon.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 Mon, May 04, 2020 at 01:16:10PM +0300, Shenhar, Talel wrote: > > > + mci = edac_mc_alloc(0, ARRAY_SIZE(layers), layers, > > > + sizeof(struct al_mc_edac)); > > You can let that line stick out. > > I rather avoid having this as a checkpatch warnning... (automation and > stuff...) checkpatch.pl - while useful - should not be taken to the letter and human brain should be applied to sanity check it what it warns about. > This line break does seems to my eye as too hard to read. > > Let me know if you feel strongly about it. I'm just sayin' - in the end of the day you'll be staring at that code - not me - so whatever *you* prefer. :-) Just don't follow tools blindly. > > > + if (al_mc->irq_ue <= 0 || al_mc->irq_ce <= 0) > > Shouldn't this be && here? > > > > I mean, you want to poll when neither of the IRQs can be found. But then > > if you find one of them and not the other, what do you do? Poll and > > interrupt? Is that case even possible? > > Correct. > > In case dt defined interrupt line only for one type and not for the other, > than the interrupt mode shall be used for one of them while polling mode for > the other. That warrants a comment above it. Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette