From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 04/18] ACPI / APEI: Switch NOTIFY_SEA to use the estatus queue Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 19:04:46 +0200 Message-ID: <20180928170446.GE20768@zn.tnic> References: <20180921221705.6478-1-james.morse@arm.com> <20180921221705.6478-5-james.morse@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180921221705.6478-5-james.morse@arm.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu To: James Morse Cc: jonathan.zhang@cavium.com, Rafael Wysocki , Tony Luck , linux-mm@kvack.org, Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Tyler Baicar , Will Deacon , Dongjiu Geng , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Punit Agrawal , Naoya Horiguchi , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Len Brown List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 11:16:51PM +0100, James Morse wrote: > Now that the estatus queue can be used by more than one notification > method, we can move notifications that have NMI-like behaviour over to > it, and start abstracting GHES's single in_nmi() path. > > Switch NOTIFY_SEA over to use the estatus queue. This makes it behave > in the same way as x86's NOTIFY_NMI. > > Signed-off-by: James Morse > Reviewed-by: Punit Agrawal > Tested-by: Tyler Baicar > --- > drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 23 +++++++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > index d7c46236b353..150fb184c7cb 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > @@ -58,6 +58,10 @@ > > #define GHES_PFX "GHES: " > > +#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_NMI) || defined(CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_SEA) > +#define WANT_NMI_ESTATUS_QUEUE 1 > +#endif Is that just so that you have shorter ifdeffery lines? Because if so, an additional level of indirection is silly. Or maybe there's more coming - I'll see when I continue going through this set. :) Otherwise looks good - trying to reuse the facilities and all. Better. :) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.