On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 08:45:09AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em 30-04-2012 08:11, Borislav Petkov escreveu: > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 07:58:33AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > >> For example, this is the mapping used by the second memory controller of > >> the SB machine > >> I'm using on my tests: > >> > >> [52803.640043] EDAC DEBUG: sbridge_probe: Registering MC#1 (2 of 2) > >> ... > >> [52803.640062] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc(): allocating 7196 > >> bytes for mci data (12 dimms, 12 csrows/channels) > >> [52803.640070] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: initializing 12 > >> dimms > >> [52803.640072] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 0: dimm0 (0:0:0): > >> row 0, chan 0 > >> [52803.640074] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 1: dimm1 (0:1:0): > >> row 0, chan 1 > >> [52803.640077] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 2: dimm2 (0:2:0): > >> row 0, chan 2 > >> [52803.640080] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 3: dimm3 (1:0:0): > >> row 0, chan 3 > >> [52803.640083] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 4: dimm4 (1:1:0): > >> row 1, chan 0 > >> [52803.640086] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 5: dimm5 (1:2:0): > >> row 1, chan 1 > >> [52803.640089] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 6: dimm6 (2:0:0): > >> row 1, chan 2 > >> [52803.640092] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 7: dimm7 (2:1:0): > >> row 1, chan 3 > >> [52803.640095] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 8: dimm8 (2:2:0): > >> row 2, chan 0 > >> [52803.640098] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 9: dimm9 (3:0:0): > >> row 2, chan 1 > >> [52803.640101] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 10: dimm10 > >> (3:1:0): row 2, chan 2 > >> [52803.640104] EDAC DEBUG: edac_mc_alloc: edac_mc_alloc: 11: dimm11 > >> (3:2:0): row 2, chan 3 > >> > >> With the above info, it is clear that the DIMM located at mc#1, channel#3 > >> slot#2 is > >> called "dimm11" at the new API, and corresponds to "csrow 2, channel 3" > >> for a legacy > >> EDAC API call. > > > > Are all those DIMM slots above populated? What happens if they're not, > > are you issuing the same dimm0-dimm11 lines for slots which aren't even > > populated? > > > > I have a much better idea: Generally, this debug info should come from > > the specific driver that allocates the dimm descriptors, not from the > > EDAC core. This way, you know in the driver which slots are populated > > and those which are not should be omitted. > > The drivers don't allocate the dimm descriptors. They're allocated by the > core.
I know that. The drivers call into EDAC core using edac_mc_alloc, this is what I meant above. > > This way it says "initializing 12 dimms" and the user thinks there are > > 12 DIMMs on his system where this might not be true. > > > I'm OK to remove the "initializing 12 dimms" message. It doesn't add anything > new. > > With regards do the other messages, if the debug messages are not clear, > then let's fix them, instead of removing. What if we print, instead, > on a message like: > > "row 1, chan 1 will represent dimm5 (1:2:0) if not empty" How about the following instead: the specific driver calls edac_mc_alloc(), it gets the allocated dimm array in mci->dimms _without_ dumping each dimm%d line. Then, each driver figures out which subset of that dimms array actually has populated slots and prints only the populated rank/slot/... This information is much more valuable than saying how many _possible_ slots the edac core has allocated. Then, each driver can decide whether it makes sense to dump that info or not. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach GM: Alberto Bozzo Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551 _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
