From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mattieu.souchaud@free.fr Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 09:33:52 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mce: Improve mcheck_init_device() error handling Message-Id: <2103538240.232636551.1399455232411.JavaMail.root@zimbra10-e2.priv.proxad.net> List-Id: In-Reply-To: <20140506062710.GB25208@gmail.com> References: <1399151031-19905-1-git-send-email-mattieu.souchaud@free.fr> In-Reply-To: <1399151031-19905-1-git-send-email-mattieu.souchaud@free.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: Ingo Molnar Cc: bp@alien8.de, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Tony Luck Ok, thanks, that's better. I'll put your modifications in the patch v3. ----- Mail original ----- De: "Ingo Molnar" À: "Tony Luck" Cc: "Mathieu Souchaud" , bp@alien8.de, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Envoyé: Mardi 6 Mai 2014 08:27:10 Objet: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mce: Improve mcheck_init_device() error handling * Luck, Tony wrote: > +err_device_create: > + /* > + * mce_device_remove behave properly if mce_device_create was not > + * called on that device. > + */ > + for_each_possible_cpu(i) > + mce_device_remove(i); > > grammar comment "s/behave/behaves/" > > Though perhaps this is better: > > /* > * We didn't keep track of which devices were created above, but > * even if we had, the set of online cpus might have changed. > * Play safe and remove for every possible cpu since mce_device_remove() > * will do the right thing. > */ and I guess: s/cpu since/cpu, since/ ? Thanks, Ingo