Re: [GIT PULL] 2 RAS fixes for 3.17, refreshed

2014-06-27 Thread Boris Ostrovsky
On 06/27/2014 12:08 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:12:59AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: Yes, it fails because xen_late_init_mcelog() registers /dev/mcelog and (I think) it happens before mcheck_init_device(). Yes, mcheck_init_device is device_initcall_sync() while xen_la

Re: [GIT PULL] 2 RAS fixes for 3.17, refreshed

2014-06-27 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:12:59AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > Yes, it fails because xen_late_init_mcelog() registers /dev/mcelog and (I > think) it happens before mcheck_init_device(). Yes, mcheck_init_device is device_initcall_sync() while xen_late_init_mcelog() is device_initcall(). > In o

Re: [GIT PULL] 2 RAS fixes for 3.17, refreshed

2014-06-27 Thread Boris Ostrovsky
On 06/27/2014 11:01 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 09:27:01AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: Isn't that one a regression that was introduced in 3.16? Hrrm, BorisO, you said misc_register would often fail in xen, is that correct? Because if so, we added the error check t

Re: [GIT PULL] 2 RAS fixes for 3.17, refreshed

2014-06-27 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 09:27:01AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > Isn't that one a regression that was introduced in 3.16? Hrrm, BorisO, you said misc_register would often fail in xen, is that correct? Because if so, we added the error check to misc_register in 3.16 so the mcheck_init_devic

Re: [GIT PULL] 2 RAS fixes for 3.17, refreshed

2014-06-27 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 03:24:39PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 06:46:03PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > please queue this for 3.17. We had it ready earlier but decided to delay > > it for an extra testing period. > > Actually, ignore that one. Here

[GIT PULL] 2 RAS fixes for 3.17, refreshed

2014-06-24 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 06:46:03PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > Hi guys, > > please queue this for 3.17. We had it ready earlier but decided to delay > it for an extra testing period. Actually, ignore that one. Here's a new pull request adding a fix for an issue BorisO reported. All non-critic