> -----Original Message----- > From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> > Sent: Friday, March 30, 2018 7:25 AM > To: Ghannam, Yazen <yazen.ghan...@amd.com> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de>; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; linux- > ker...@vger.kernel.org; x...@kernel.org; tony.l...@intel.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info > Structure > > On 29 March 2018 at 14:53, Ghannam, Yazen <yazen.ghan...@amd.com> > wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> > >> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 6:55 AM > >> To: Ghannam, Yazen <yazen.ghan...@amd.com> > >> Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > >> ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; x...@kernel.org; tony.l...@intel.com > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/8] efi: Decode IA32/X64 Processor Error Info > >> Structure > >> > >> On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 01:49:35PM -0500, Yazen Ghannam wrote: > >> > From: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghan...@amd.com> > >> > > >> > Print the fields in the IA32/X64 Processor Error Info Structure. > >> > > >> > Based on UEFI 2.7 Table 253. IA32/X64 Processor Error Information > >> > Structure. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghan...@amd.com> > >> > --- > >> > Link: > >> > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180226193904.20532-4- > >> yazen.ghan...@amd.com > >> > > >> > v2->v3: > >> > * Fix table number in commit message. > >> > * Don't print raw validation bits. > >> > > >> > v1->v2: > >> > * Add parantheses around "bits" expression in macro. > >> > * Fix indentation on multi-line statements. > >> > > >> > drivers/firmware/efi/cper-x86.c | 50 > >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> > 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+) > >> > > >> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-x86.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper- > >> x86.c > >> > index 863f0cd2a0ff..a9ab3bbf7986 100644 > >> > --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-x86.c > >> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-x86.c > >> > @@ -3,15 +3,28 @@ > >> > > >> > #include <linux/cper.h> > >> > > >> > +#define INDENT_SP " " > >> > >> There's that thing again. So it was a total waste of time discussing > >> this last time. So let me save my time this time: > >> > >> NAKed-by: Borislav Petkov <b...@suse.de> > >> > > > > IIRC, the arguments for keeping this are > > 1) convention for CPER > > 2) code readability > > > > The argument against was > > 1) it's dumb > > > > So I decided to keep it. I don't really mind either way so I'll change it > > if there's a second opinion. > > > > Yes, please change it.
Okay, will do. Should I include a patch that changes it for the other CPER code also? Thanks, Yazen
