From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f197.google.com (mail-wr0-f197.google.com [209.85.128.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC59F6B0005 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 17:35:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wr0-f197.google.com with SMTP id j3so4933689wrb.18 for ; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 14:35:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de. [2a01:4f8:190:11c2::b:1457]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r67si3095814wma.264.2018.03.01.14.35.34 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Mar 2018 14:35:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 23:35:29 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] ACPI / APEI: Generalise the estatus queue's add/remove and notify code Message-ID: <20180301223529.GA28811@pd.tnic> References: <20180215185606.26736-1-james.morse@arm.com> <20180215185606.26736-3-james.morse@arm.com> <20180301150144.GA4215@pd.tnic> <87sh9jbrgc.fsf@e105922-lin.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87sh9jbrgc.fsf@e105922-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Punit Agrawal Cc: James Morse , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Christoffer Dall , Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Naoya Horiguchi , Rafael Wysocki , Len Brown , Tony Luck , Tyler Baicar , Dongjiu Geng , Xie XiuQi On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 06:06:59PM +0000, Punit Agrawal wrote: > You're looking at support for the 32-bit ARM systems. I know. That's why I'm asking. > The 64-bit support lives in arch/arm64 and the die() there doesn't > contain an oops_begin()/oops_end(). But the lack of oops_begin() on > arm64 doesn't really matter here. Yap. > One issue I see with calling die() is that it is defined in different > includes across various architectures, (e.g., include/asm/kdebug.h for > x86, include/asm/system_misc.h in arm64, etc.) I don't think that's insurmountable. The more important question is, can we do the same set of calls when panic severity on all architectures which support APEI or should we have arch-specific ghes_panic() callbacks or so. As it is now, it would turn into a mess if we start with the ifdeffery and the different requirements architectures might have... Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org