Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 11 Dec 2021 16:39:01 +0100 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/MCE/AMD: Provide an "Unknown" MCA bank type |
| |
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 04:28:42PM +0000, Yazen Ghannam wrote: > Sure thing. But I don't think removing the second directory will be okay. The > layout is "bank"/"block". If the "block" has special use like DRAM ECC, or L3 > Cache on older systems, then it'll have a unique name. Otherwise, the block > will take the name of the bank.
Ah, there was something... and I found a good example on my zen1 box:
├── umc_0 │ ├── dram_ecc │ │ ├── error_count │ │ ├── interrupt_enable │ │ └── threshold_limit │ └── misc_umc │ ├── error_count │ ├── interrupt_enable │ └── threshold_limit
but yeah, that still doesn't make it clear how the hierarchy is...
> /sys/devices/system/machinecheck/machinecheck0/thresholding > ├── bank0 > │ ├── desc ("Instruction Fetch") > │ └── block0 > │ ├── desc ("All Errors") > │ ├── error_count > │ ├── interrupt_enable > │ └── threshold_limit > ├── bank1 > │ ├── desc ("Northbridge") > │ ├── block0 > │ │ ├── desc ("DRAM Errors") > │ │ ├── error_count > │ │ ├── interrupt_enable > │ │ └── threshold_limit > │ └── block1 > │ ├── desc ("Link Errors") > │ ├── error_count > │ ├── interrupt_enable > │ └── threshold_limit > ... > > I'm inclined to the second option, since it keeps all the thresholding > functionality under a single directory.
Yeah, that makes it explicit and one can see that a bank can have multiple blocks.
Renaming will change the ABI but we can always do symlinks later if people complain. Which I doubt because I've yet to hear of someone using that thresholding thing at all...
Thx.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
| |