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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 3D510C10F14 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:57:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECEC421783 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:57:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org ECEC421783 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46k3kG2lvwzDqVP for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 03:57:10 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=nathanl@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46k3gs6WdxzDqQ0 for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 03:55:05 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x92HqWeY115787; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 13:55:00 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2vd03qs4pa-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:55:00 -0400 Received: from m0098419.ppops.net (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x92HqbAV116243; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 13:55:00 -0400 Received: from ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com (fd.55.37a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.55.85.253]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2vd03qs4p6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:54:59 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x92Ho1Jg002318; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:55:01 GMT Received: from b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.28]) by ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 2v9y57nrfd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Oct 2019 17:55:01 +0000 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x92Hsxrb43581834 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:54:59 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E688AB2066; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:54:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF878B2065; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:54:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (unknown [9.85.153.250]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:54:58 +0000 (GMT) From: Nathan Lynch To: Srikar Dronamraju Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] powerpc/numa: Handle extra hcall_vphn error cases In-Reply-To: <20190913110945.12564-3-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20190913110945.12564-1-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20190913110945.12564-3-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:54:58 -0500 Message-ID: <87o8yzjaml.fsf@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-10-02_08:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=890 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1910020147 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Satheesh Rajendran , linuxppc-dev , Nicholas Piggin Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Srikar Dronamraju writes: > Currently code handles H_FUNCTION, H_SUCCESS, H_HARDWARE return codes. > However hcall_vphn can return other return codes. Now it also handles > H_PARAMETER return code. Also the rest return codes are handled under the > default case. Reviewed-by: Nathan Lynch However: > + case H_PARAMETER: > + pr_err_ratelimited("hcall_vphn() was passed an invalid parameter. " > + "Disabling polling...\n"); Consider including the bad parameter value in the message?