On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:27:41PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
> Boris: you coded up a "static bool memory_error(struct mce *m)"
> function inside the patches for the corrected error thingy.
>
> Perhaps when it goes upstream it should be available for other
> users too?
I don't see why not. struct m
On 04/21, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 02:35:51PM -0600, Vishal Verma wrote:
> > On 04/21, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > Needs extra parentheses to make it right. Vishal, sorry I led you astray.
> > >
> > > if (!((mce->status & 0xef80) == BIT(7)))
> >
> > Is this still right though? An
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 02:35:51PM -0600, Vishal Verma wrote:
> On 04/21, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > Needs extra parentheses to make it right. Vishal, sorry I led you astray.
> >
> > if (!((mce->status & 0xef80) == BIT(7)))
>
> Is this still right though? Anything AND'ed with 0xef80 will never equ
On 04/21, Luck, Tony wrote:
> >> > + if (!(mce->status & 0xef80) == BIT(7))
> >>
> >> Can we get a define for this, or a comment explaining all the magic
> >> that's happening on that one line?
> >
> > Yes - also like lkp pointed out, the check isn't correct at all. Let me
> > figure out wha
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:19:16PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> >>> > + if (!(mce->status & 0xef80) == BIT(7))
> >>>
> >>> Can we get a define for this, or a comment explaining all the magic
> >>> that's happening on that one line?
> >>
>
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
>>> > + if (!(mce->status & 0xef80) == BIT(7))
>>>
>>> Can we get a define for this, or a comment explaining all the magic
>>> that's happening on that one line?
>>
>> Yes - also like lkp pointed out, the check isn't correct at all. Let me
>
>> > + if (!(mce->status & 0xef80) == BIT(7))
>>
>> Can we get a define for this, or a comment explaining all the magic
>> that's happening on that one line?
>
> Yes - also like lkp pointed out, the check isn't correct at all. Let me
> figure out what really needs to be done, and I will rese
On Fri, 2017-04-21 at 12:21 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Vishal Verma m> wrote:
> > The check for an MCE being a memory error in the NFIT mce handler
> > was
> > bogus. Fix it to check for the correct MCA status compound error
> > code.
> >
> > Reported-by: Tony L
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Vishal Verma wrote:
> The check for an MCE being a memory error in the NFIT mce handler was
> bogus. Fix it to check for the correct MCA status compound error code.
>
> Reported-by: Tony Luck
> Cc:
> Signed-off-by: Vishal Verma
> ---
> drivers/acpi/nfit/mce.c |
Hi Vishal,
[auto build test WARNING on pm/linux-next]
[also build test WARNING on v4.11-rc7 next-20170420]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improve the system]
url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Vishal-Verma/acpi-nfit-fix-the-memory-er
On Thu, 2017-04-20 at 16:18 -0600, Vishal Verma wrote:
> The check for an MCE being a memory error in the NFIT mce handler was
> bogus. Fix it to check for the correct MCA status compound error code.
>
> Reported-by: Tony Luck
> Cc:
Forgot to include,
Fixes: 6839a6d96f4e nfit: do an ARS scrub o
The check for an MCE being a memory error in the NFIT mce handler was
bogus. Fix it to check for the correct MCA status compound error code.
Reported-by: Tony Luck
Cc:
Signed-off-by: Vishal Verma
---
drivers/acpi/nfit/mce.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/dr
12 matches
Mail list logo
