On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 16:15 +1100, Russell Currey wrote: > On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 14:56 +1100, Andrew Donnellan wrote: > > On 15/03/16 14:26, Russell Currey wrote: > > > > > > The HMI code knows about three types of errors: CORE, NX and UNKNOWN. > > > If OPAL were to add a new type, it would not be handled at all since > > > there is no fallback case. Instead of explicitly checking for UNKNOWN, > > > treat any checkstop type without a handler as unknown. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Russell Currey <rus...@russell.cc> > > Indeed it looks like there isn't a fallback case. > > > > Would it be useful to print xstop_type in the unknown case? > > I don't think so - if there's a new checkstop type, specific handling for > it should be implemented in the kernel, and if you're getting unknown > checkstops that are bringing down your machine you should be looking at the > OPAL firmware log anyway, which would contain details if there was > something "new".
That's probably true. But it's trivial to print it out, so I'd rather we did. Putting it in a local would be nice, rather than saying hmi_evt->u.xstop_error.xstop_type twice. cheers _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
