On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:24:35PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote: > Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 22:24:35 +0530 > From: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: "Chen, Gong" <gong.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx, bp@xxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, > linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, m.chehab@xxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] ACPI / trace: Add trace interface for eMCA driver > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) > > On 2013/10/11 02:32AM, Chen Gong wrote: > > Use trace interface to elaborate all H/W error related > > information. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen, Gong <gong.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > <snip> > > +TRACE_EVENT(extlog_mem_event, > > + TP_PROTO(u32 etype, > > + char *dimm_loc, > > + const uuid_le *fru_id, > > + char *fru_text, > > + u64 error_count, > > + u32 severity, > > + u64 phy_addr, > > + char *mem_loc), > > [Adding Mauro...] > > This looks very similar to the trace event I wrote a while back, > which was similar to the one provided by ghes_edac: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.pci/24616 > > Seems to me this has the same issues we previously discussed w.r.t > EDAC conflicts... > This thread is so long. I have to say I'm lost ... Anyway, it looks like there are many different opnions on this last patch. I will send the 2nd version for further discussion soon.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
