Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1701603
| From | "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@hpe.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC, ghes: Make it a proper module |
| Date | 2017-08-02 02:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u9PHX-2zV-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <u7qkG-6w4-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <u8iEp-7vB-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <u8tJv-6SE-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <u9pku-2jJ-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <u9BYl-1SZ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 11:46 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 08:19:32PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > I'd prefer to add the whitelist check to ghes_edac first. This > > makes the existing code to work. We can then work on refactoring > > changes like this on top of it without breaking the functionality. > > Yes, but we want only the whitelist - not the FF testing because, as > we said, BIOS is notoriously buggy so we're going to load ghes_edac > only on known-good platforms. This GHES-probe itself is appropriate and should remain. Since not all GHES firmware can be trusted, we will add the white-list as an additional condition to complement this check. > Which brings the question about the priority. > > And I *think* the easiest would be if the whitelist were in the core > edac.ko module, perhaps in edac_module.c (even though it doesn't > really matter, technically). I agree that adding the white-list into the core edac module is the easiest when we make the change on top of yours. Thinking further on this, though, I now think that keeping the current implementation is more reasonable with the reasons below. 1. Device-probing-logic should belong to a driver, and should remain private to a driver. When we add the white-list, it should be added to ghes_edac. 2. ghes_edac is an extension to the ghes driver as they both are specific to ghes. ghes_edac is merely ghes driver's edac error- reporting wrapper than an independent edac driver. It looks OK to let ghes_edac get registered as part of ghes_probe() and leave it as an unconventional edac driver. 3. EDAC does not have its managed probe-chain. All edac drivers are called from module_init list. They independently probe the hardware and get unloaded when not needed. The core edac is simply a set of library to them. I think it's good to keep them independent, and not to introduce a new central mechanism for a special case like ghes_edac. Thanks, -Toshi
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC, ghes: Make it a proper module "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@hpe.com> - 2017-07-31 22:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC, ghes: Make it a proper module Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-08-01 11:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC, ghes: Make it a proper module "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@hpe.com> - 2017-08-02 02:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC, ghes: Make it a proper module Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-08-02 05:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC, ghes: Make it a proper module "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@hpe.com> - 2017-08-03 00:50 +0200
csiph-web