On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:30:37PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Would it make sense to organize it a bit more and separate out vendor
> specific functionality:
>
> mce/cpu/intel.c
> mce/cpu/intel-p5.c
> mce/cpu/amd.c
> mce/cpu/winchip.c
That's too fine-grained IMO and look at the path we'd get then:
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/cpu/intel.c
^^^ ^^^
which brings me to something we already talked about: the "kernel" part
of the arch/x86/ paths. See this thread:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140114185802.gb29...@pd.tnic
from 2014. We practically agreed there that "kernel/" is redundant as it
all is kernel. So maybe we should start moving stuff up into arch/x86/
and then kill kernel/ eventually.
> This way there's a clear separation between low level, vendor specific
> MCE logic and higher level MCE logic.
>
> mce/apei.c, if this is an Intel-only feature, could perhaps become
> mce/cpu/intel-apei.c?
Yeah, I think the pile in mce/ is pretty succinct now. We can always
separate it more later, if it starts to hurt but right now it is ok,
IMO.
> Anyway, your patch is fine too, so whichever subset you decide to use:
>
> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org>
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
