Your mail client broke threading...
On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 06:52:24AM +0000, Gregor Herburger wrote:
> The cap_low, cap_high and syndrome are used in the printk following the
> if-Block.
> This will make expected data / captured data look the same.
Right.
> @@ -334,18 +337,32 @@ static void fsl_mc_check(struct mem_ctl_info *mci)
> sbe_ecc_decode(cap_high, cap_low, syndrome,
> &bad_data_bit, &bad_ecc_bit);
>
> + exp_high = cap_high;
> + exp_low = cap_low;
> + exp_syndrome = syndrome;
> +
> if (bad_data_bit != -1)
> + {
Opening brace is on the same line for if-statements.
> fsl_mc_printk(mci, KERN_ERR,
> "Faulty Data bit: %d\n", bad_data_bit);
> +
> + if (bad_data_bit < 32)
> + exp_low = cap_low ^ (1 << bad_data_bit);
> + else
> + exp_high = cap_high ^ (1 << (bad_data_bit -
> 32));
> + }
> +
> if (bad_ecc_bit != -1)
> + {
Ditto.
> fsl_mc_printk(mci, KERN_ERR,
> "Faulty ECC bit: %d\n", bad_ecc_bit);
>
> + exp_syndrome = syndrome ^ (1 << bad_ecc_bit);
> + }
> +
> fsl_mc_printk(mci, KERN_ERR,
> "Expected Data / ECC:\t%#8.8x_%08x / %#2.2x\n",
> - cap_high ^ (1 << (bad_data_bit - 32)),
> - cap_low ^ (1 << bad_data_bit),
> - syndrome ^ (1 << bad_ecc_bit));
> + exp_high, exp_low, exp_syndrome);
> }
>
> fsl_mc_printk(mci, KERN_ERR,
> "Captured Data / ECC:\t%#8.8x_%08x / %#2.2x\n",
> cap_high, cap_low, syndrome);
>
> How about something like this?
My only concern here is that you'll be printing "Expected Data ..."
unconditionally even if either or both - bad_data_bit and bad_ecc_bit
- are -1.
If the driver cannot decode the data and/or ECC syndrome bits, then it
should say so - not dump expected data and claim that it is a valid
information.
So maybe in addition to the above:
if (bad_data_bit != -1) {
...
} else {
fsl_mc_printk(..., "Unable to decode the Faulty Data bit");
}
and the same for the ECC bit.
And then print only the expected data for the bit which sbe_ecc_decode()
found correctly and not say anything otherwise.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
