Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] x86, mce, severity: extend the the mce_severity mechanism to handle UCNA/DEFERRED error

[Borislav Petkov]

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 04:06:00PM -0600, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
> >+	MCESEV(
> >+		DEFERRED, "Deferred error",
> >+		NOSER, MASK(MCI_STATUS_UC|MCI_STATUS_DEFERRED|MCI_STATUS_POISON, MCI_STATUS_DEFERRED)
> >  		),
> 
> We don't need to have MCI_STATUS_POISON in the MASK() here as a deferred
> error is indicated by a {UC=0, Deferred = 1}
> (Older docs might be unclear on that..)

Well, I think that's ok because the MASK() macro actually makes the
check do:

look at bits MCI_STATUS_UC|MCI_STATUS_DEFERRED|MCI_STATUS_POISON and of
them three MCI_STATUS_DEFERRED has to be the only one set.

And that makes sense - we want deferred errors where we didn't attempt
to consume poisoned data (which is signalled by MCI_STATUS_POISON)....

Provided I'm reading this mce_severity thing correct, of course - more
often than not I don't because it is insanely ugly and hard to read.

> And it still says ADM on the commit message :)

Yeah, Advanced Devices Micro - that's the new name. :-P

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/