Re: [PATCH] powerpc/pseries: Make request_ras_irqs() available to other pseries code

[Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1236 bytes --]

On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 16:35 +1000, Mark Nelson wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> Thanks for looking over these patches!
..
> > 
> > Existing code I know, but the error handling in here is a little lax,
> > what's not going to work if we miss some or all of the interrupts?
> 
> That's a good point. For the existing code, if we miss an EPOW event
> it just means that the event won't be logged (as that's all we do with
> those events at the moment, although there is a comment saying
> that it should be fixed to take appropriate action depending upon the
> type of power failure); but it's a bigger problem if we miss one of the
> RAS errors because then we could miss a fatal event that we should halt
> the machine on. And for the upcoming IO events it's even worse as we'd
> miss an interrupt from the device...

Yeah that's what I was thinking.

> I would do it in a follow-on patch rather than this one, but what would
> be a good course of action if we can't request the interrupt?

Yes a follow on patch is the way to do it.

There shouldn't be that many reasons the request fails, other than
ENOMEM, or broken device tree perhaps. It's definitely worth a
WARN_ON(), people notice those at least.

cheers

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]