On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 04:13:22PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 05/21/2015 02:11 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >From: Borislav Petkov<bp@xxxxxxx>
> >
> >So first of all, this atomic_scrub() function's naming is bad. It looks
> >like an atomic_t helper. Change it to edac_atomic_scrub().
> >
> >The bigger problem is that this function is arch-specific and every new
> >arch which doesn't necessarily need that functionality still needs to
> >define it, otherwise EDAC doesn't compile.
> >
> >So instead of doing that and including arch-specific headers, have each
> >arch define an EDAC_ATOMIC_SCRUB symbol which can be used in edac_mc.c
> >for ifdeffery. Much cleaner.
> >
> >We already are doing this with another symbol - EDAC_SUPPORT. This is
> >also much cleaner than having CONFIG_EDAC explicitly depend on all the
> >arches which need/have EDAC support and drivers.
> >
> >This way I can kill the useless edac.h header in tile too.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov<bp@xxxxxxx>
>
> Acked-by: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx> [for tile]
Thanks.
Just to clarify after today's discussion on IRC: this patch doesn't
change current DRAM scrubbing behavior on the relevant arches - it
simply makes the definition of that atomic_scrub thing non-mandatory on
new arches or on those which don't need it.
In the meantime, patch has been build-tested on arm and ppc - the two
I'm missing an ACK for.
:-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
