> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-edac-ow...@vger.kernel.org <linux-edac-ow...@vger.kernel.org> On > Behalf Of Borislav Petkov > Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 11:37 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen <yazen.ghan...@amd.com> > Cc: Luck, Tony <tony.l...@intel.com>; linux-e...@vger.kernel.org; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; x...@kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] x86/MCE: Save MCA control bits that get set in > hardware > > On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 02:49:42PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > > Would you mind if the function name stayed the same? The reason is > > that MCA_CTL is written here, which is the "init" part, and MCA_STATUS > > is cleared. > > > > I can use another name for the check, e.g. __mcheck_cpu_check_banks() > > or __mcheck_cpu_banks_check_init(). > > Nevermind, leave it as is. I'll fix it up ontop. I don't like that > "__mcheck_cpu_init" prefixing there which is a mouthful and should > simply be "mce_cpu_<do_stuff>" to denote that it is a function which is > run on a CPU to setup stuff. >
Yeah, I agree. I have another version of this set that I can send today. It includes the changes for this patch and also includes the fix for the locking bug message. Should I send out the new version? Or do you want me to wait for any fixes on top of the current version? Thanks, Yazen
