From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760498Ab2CNWk4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2012 18:40:56 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f52.google.com ([209.85.210.52]:34403 "EHLO mail-pz0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752606Ab2CNWky (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2012 18:40:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:40:50 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linux Edac Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Add a per-dimm structure Message-ID: <20120314224050.GA32297@kroah.com> References: <1331120438-27523-1-git-send-email-mchehab@redhat.com> <20120313233217.GB31106@kroah.com> <4F60F2E4.7060707@redhat.com> <20120314204355.GA10187@kroah.com> <20120314223102.GA27602@aftab> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120314223102.GA27602@aftab> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:31:02PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 01:43:55PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > He thinks that a multi-layer struct should be created inside that directory > > > (it could have 2 or 3 levels of directories, depending on how the memory is > > > organized at the memory controller), instead of having a large number of files > > > there. > > > > Why create subdirs? If those subdirectories are not real devices, > > showing a real hierarchy, then do not create them as userspace will get > > very confused very quickly. > > Why, IMO, we agreed on the following layout > > rank0/ > |-- dimm_dev_type > |-- dimm_edac_mode > |-- dimm_label > |-- dimm_location > |-- dimm_mem_type > |-- CE > |-- UE > `-- dimm_size > > with CE being the correctable errors counter and UE be optional and only > present when it makes sense for the hardware. > > This is not multi-layered, it is very easy to implement and mirrors all > possible memory controllers from the point of view of the single DIMM. > no? Or am I missing something...? Looks fine to me, assuming "rankX" is the dimm itself? greg k-h