From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E24626772D; Fri, 14 Feb 2025 16:38:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739551083; cv=none; b=KL5PrF1pHIrMIwNlMO8+Thl9vQ1fvVwhLjxa/bJizwIczPzja/arP+KOJ1//iossIdyQ8VHScVWFv1w/vnhOdCpNCUueLjw7S9i62WWcwclQ6rMQW7PAeFi3g9SJotYvlFxXUiUvCwxhGxoV503Cfug3fDSq39VMWbVJnyEkdmY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739551083; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5OPVb7m5df2EcHYY/XuL+JV7Boa3i1xtk+u+WanVTJA=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=FCcsmER1j3BjcR0guFmP/AV/w/jGhVebD+mJgAdh4B+B88QUCg+bzU0qN7mG0Th0c7snFvXZaa6uvLe1VlLOKpvej5VKA/gghws1Xz7Rd7vOC9dXDbktyhxqxKQE5wLttqAUB8bboHjbbkLZLS66caQCN51Zj3eE/3oFgYTr4jo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.231]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Yvd3p2rK8z6HJcn; Sat, 15 Feb 2025 00:36:38 +0800 (CST) Received: from frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.182.85.71]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FC5A1402CB; Sat, 15 Feb 2025 00:38:00 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.203.177.66) by frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.71) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Fri, 14 Feb 2025 17:37:59 +0100 Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 16:37:58 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Robert Richter CC: Alison Schofield , Vishal Verma , Ira Weiny , Dan Williams , Dave Jiang , "Davidlohr Bueso" , , , Gregory Price , "Fabio M. De Francesco" , Terry Bowman Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 18/18] cxl/acpi: Unify CFMWS memory log messages with SRAT messages Message-ID: <20250214163758.00002f4b@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20250211095349.981096-19-rrichter@amd.com> References: <20250211095349.981096-1-rrichter@amd.com> <20250211095349.981096-19-rrichter@amd.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100012.china.huawei.com (7.191.174.184) To frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.71) On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:53:48 +0100 Robert Richter wrote: > CFMWS entries have a similar importance as SRAT table entries to > describe memory regions. For CXL error analysis and memory debugging > information of both is needed. Unify output of both messages to > improve logging. Change the style of CFMWS message according to SRAT > output. Also, turn messages into a dev_info() same as for SRAT. > > SRAT pr_info() for reference: > > drivers/acpi/numa/srat.c: > pr_info("SRAT: Node %u PXM %u [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]%s%s\n", > > Signed-off-by: Robert Richter > Reviewed-by: Gregory Price > Tested-by: Gregory Price Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron