From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] CPER: Adjust code flow of some functions Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 20:05:54 +0200 Message-ID: <20140415180553.GF4826@pd.tnic> References: <1395985981-20476-1-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> <1395985981-20476-3-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> <20140414133924.GC3663@pd.tnic> <20140415091944.GB29868@gchen.bj.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:51509 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750930AbaDOSF4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2014 14:05:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140415091944.GB29868@gchen.bj.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Chen, Gong" Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, m.chehab@samsung.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, arozansk@redhat.com On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 05:19:44AM -0400, Chen, Gong wrote: > > Why the DMI handle? Why not say: "unable to find location" or "location > > not present in DMI" or something more user-friendly. > In essential, I use the suggestion from Tony Luck. DMI handle can't be found > so I just list the original info for it. Maybe I can merge them into one. Yep. Make it user-friendly while showing the original info pls. > > > +#define CPER_REC_LEN 512 > > > > How did we come up with this? Some spec? 512 chars for an error record? > > That's a bit too much in my book. > > > Because 128 is not enough once all fields in error record exist, and 256 looks > a little bit tough so I choose a bigger value. No spec for it. I just hope Tough? How? Not enough? > it can contain everything. Pls add a comment over this definition to state why we've chosen this number exactly. Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --