Kumar Gala <ga...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > [Xie Shaohui-B21989] Hi Alex, seems your suggestion is some kind of > > conflict with Kumar, you can have a look at > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/67774/ > > I think Alex's comment is the fact we ignore the 'return' value in the machine_check_e500 case.
Yes, this one and plus the fact that Mchk exception messages are printed even if it was handled successfully (by RIO handler). Messages are printed in both: e500 and e500mc handlers. Alex. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
