> -----Original Message----- > From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@alien8.de] > Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 9:57 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen <yazen.ghan...@amd.com> > Cc: linux-e...@vger.kernel.org; Tony Luck <tony.l...@intel.com>; > x...@kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86/mce/AMD: Define a list_head for threshold > blocks outside the list > > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 12:39:03PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote: > > Like I said in the commit message, the list_head needs to be outside > > the list to access all the elements using list_for_each*. Otherwise, > > we won't get a reference to the "head" element since we iterate > > starting from > > head->next and break when !head. > > I believe the whole hierarchy here is done a bit differently: the list starts > at > threshold_bank->blocks which points to the first threshold block. So when > iterating, you need to look at threshold_bank->blocks first, which is the > first > element and then traverse the list. >
Yeah, I thought about doing this in the THR interrupt handler. But then I thought it might be better to re-define the head so that we could iterate through all of the elements without having to check the first and iterate the rest. > This is basically how the list gets built: > > allocate_threshold_blocks: > > ... > > if (per_cpu(threshold_banks, cpu)[bank]->blocks) > list_add(&b->miscj, &per_cpu(threshold_banks, > cpu)[bank]->blocks- > >miscj); > else > per_cpu(threshold_banks, cpu)[bank]->blocks = b; > > per_cpu(threshold_banks, cpu)[bank]->blocks is the first element as it points > to a struct threshold_block and then the ..->blocks->miscj contains any > further > threshold blocks present on this bank and we queue them there if ->blocks is > not NULL. > Okay, so I'll redo Patch 3 in this set and drop this one. Any comments on Patch 1? Thanks, Yazen
