public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>
To: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] Convert mce_disabled
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 13:56:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121012115628.GA14991@aftab.osrc.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5077F600.9090605@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 04:20:40PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> Hi Boris, Thanks for getting to this before I could!

Ah ok, I thought you wasn't interested in doing this anymore :).

> I had a look but I still feel boolean is a better way to go. With
> bool, we can get rid of the #defines above and more importantly, the
> aux field in dev_ext_attribute since that is used in other places
> too. Further, I suspect we'll still end up using the same or less
> memory since we don't have that many boolean members within the MCA
> code.

My main intention was to have all those in a single struct and use a
single store_bit/show_bit function.

Sure, you can do bools but this'll still be single variables spread
around in mce.c instead of one single struct mca_config which nicely
encapsulates all the configuration we do in the MCA code.

Or, you can modify the mca_config I have there and use bools and pass a
pointer to each actual bool member in each DEVICE_BIT_ATTR invocation
(and rename it to DEVICE_BOOL_ATTR). Yeah, that could work, unless I'm
missing something else, of course.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551

  reply	other threads:[~2012-10-12 11:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-10 14:19 [RFC PATCH 0/3] mca_config stuff Borislav Petkov
2012-10-10 14:19 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] Add DEVICE_BIT_ATTR Borislav Petkov
2012-10-10 14:20 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] Change mce_dont_log_ce Borislav Petkov
2012-10-10 14:20 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] Convert mce_disabled Borislav Petkov
2012-10-10 15:46   ` Luck, Tony
2012-10-10 15:53     ` Borislav Petkov
2012-10-12 10:50   ` Naveen N. Rao
2012-10-12 11:56     ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2012-10-12 17:46       ` Luck, Tony
2012-10-12 21:58         ` Borislav Petkov
2012-10-15  5:53       ` Naveen N. Rao
2012-10-10 15:35 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] mca_config stuff Luck, Tony
2012-10-10 19:53   ` Borislav Petkov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20121012115628.GA14991@aftab.osrc.amd.com \
    --to=bp@amd64.org \
    --cc=borislav.petkov@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox