> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-edac-ow...@vger.kernel.org <linux-edac-ow...@vger.kernel.org> On > Behalf Of Borislav Petkov > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2019 10:38 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen <yazen.ghan...@amd.com> > Cc: Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl>; linux-e...@vger.kernel.org; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] AMD64 EDAC fixes > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 03:28:59PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > > Boris, Do you think it'd be appropriate to change the return values > > for some cases? > > > > For example, ECC disabled is a hardware configuration. This doesn't > > mean that the module failed any operations in this case. > > > > In other words, the module checks for a feature. If the feature is not > > present, then return without failure (and maybe give a message). > > That makes sense but AFAICT if probe_one_instance() sees that ECC is not > enabled, it returns 0. > > The "if (!edac_has_mcs())" check later is to verify that at least once > instance was loaded successfully and, if not, then return an error. > > So where does it return failure? >
I was tracking down the failure with ECC disabled, and that seems to be it. So I think we should return 0 "if (!edac_has_mcs())", because we'd only get there if ECC is disabled on all nodes and there wasn't some other initialization error. I'll send a patch for this soon. Adam, would you mind testing this patch? Thanks, Yazen
