On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 02:58:46PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: > By calling edac_inc_ue_error() before panic, we get a correct UE error > count for core dump analysis.
Looks accurate, and I'll add the patch to be applied. But I wonder how big a problem it is. Isn't most of the information deriveable from the panic message? > > Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.d...@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/edac/edac_mc.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c b/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c > index 75ede27..c1f23c2 100644 > --- a/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c > +++ b/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c > @@ -1011,6 +1011,8 @@ static void edac_ue_error(struct edac_raw_error_desc *e) > e->other_detail); > } > > + edac_inc_ue_error(e); > + > if (edac_mc_get_panic_on_ue()) { > panic("UE %s%son %s (%s page:0x%lx offset:0x%lx > grain:%ld%s%s)\n", > e->msg, > @@ -1020,8 +1022,6 @@ static void edac_ue_error(struct edac_raw_error_desc *e) > *e->other_detail ? " - " : "", > e->other_detail); > } > - > - edac_inc_ue_error(e); > } > > static void edac_inc_csrow(struct edac_raw_error_desc *e, int row, int chan) > -- > 1.8.3.1 >