Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] MCE: consolidate AMD initialization

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 29.10.12 at 11:32, Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/29/12 11:22, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 29.10.12 at 11:03, Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 10/29/12 10:48, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>> On 26.10.12 at 10:26, Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> On 10/26/12 10:25, Christoph Egger wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Move AMD specific initialization to AMD files.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Let's do this properly: There's no K7 supporting 64-bit mode afaict,
>>>> so rather than moving around the call to amd_k7_mcheck_init()
>>>> can't we just drop it and the whole (inconsistently named) k7.c file?
>>>
>>> I think it is better to apply this first and then remove k7 to
>>> simplify backporting if needed/wanted.
>> 
>> I'm not seeing these changes as backporting candidates.
> 
> I had SLES in mind.
> 
>>>> Also (not in this patch of course), I'd prefer mce_amd_quirks.c
>>>> to get merged into mce_amd.c now that we have the latter.
>>>
>>> After some thinking is there some good reason to do this?
>> 
>> Imo it had been there simply because there was no mce_amd.c at
>> the time it got introduced (and afaics it should nevertheless have
>> been named mce_amd.c from the beginning).
> 
> I have a patch ready that removes k7 support which is on top of this
> init cleanup patch.
> I also have a patch which merges mce_amd_quirks into mce_amd.c on
> top of the k7 removal.
> In which order do you want them?

Okay, if you got them done already, let's go with the order you
have.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel