Hi Boris, Mark, On 2015/10/21 1:36, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 06:26:55PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: >>> Btw, how much of this is implementing generic A57 functionality? >> The driver is entirely A57 generic. >> >>> If a lot, can we make this a generic a57_edac driver so that multiple >>> vendors can use it? >> Yes. > Ok, cool. > >>> How fast and how ugly can something like that become? >> Not sure I follow. > In the sense that some vendor might require just a little bit different > handling or maybe wants to read some vendor-specific registers in > addition to the architectural ones.
Yes, you are right and foresight :) > > Then we'll start adding vendor-specific hacks to that generic driver. > And therefore the question how fast and how ugly such hacks would > become. > > I guess we'll worry about that when we get there... So I think the meaning of those error register is the same, but the way of handle it may different from SoCs, for single bit error: - SoC may trigger a interrupt; - SoC may just keep silent so we need to scan the registers using poll mechanism. For Double bit error: - SoC may also keep silent - Trigger a interrupt - Trigger a SEI (system error) Any suggestion to cover those cases? Thanks Hanjun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
