(2010/02/17 7:29), Andi Kleen wrote: > This is for a different chip (xeon75xx) > which has a completely different memory subsystem > and reports memory errors in a completely different way > than xeon75xx/core_i7. > > For core_i7/xeon55xx there is no additional event interface needed; > it's all supplied by the hardware on the existing interfaces. > > The point of this code is to annotate the CE events on Xeon 75xx > and to implement specific backend actions (page offlining, triggers) > based on specific events. These backend actions are already implemented > on 55xx without additional changes (no need for EDAC) If my understanding is correct, your patch doesn't interact with xeon75xx processor itself, but with the associated chip (I/O hub, aka Boxboro, you abbreviated it to BXB) at least at first of all. Then since MCE codes contain rather "generic, processor oriented" stuffs while EDAC codes contain relatively "specific, chipset oriented" stuffs, people can suppose that this "arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce-xeon75xx.c" could be implemented in different way and the file could have a different name like "drivers/edac/i7500_edac.c" or so. However the real issue is that I couldn't figure out why this code requires new hook in the polling handler, what is PFA, and what kind of restriction let you to do so. You noted that "The act of retrieving the DIMM/PA information can take some time" but I'm not sure it is safe even if poll handler is called via CMCI. Anyway, Andi, could you point proper specification or datasheet to know/check what you are going to do here? Otherwise I could not distinguish your work from black magic... Thanks, H.Seto -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|