lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] x86/platform updates for v5.10
From
Date


On 10/12/2020 2:42 PM, Mike Travis wrote:
>
>
> On 10/12/2020 2:27 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 02:15:55PM -0700, Mike Travis wrote:
>>>> Of course, it also looks like that 'uvh_nmi_mmrx_mask' thing is a
>>>> write-only variable so it doesn't matter, but can we _please_ get this
>>>> code fixed ASAP?
>>>
>>> Yes, I'll look at it right now.  Thanks.
>>
>> As this variable is write-only you could simply zap it now with a patch
>> ontop to fix the build and then introduce it properly later, when you
>> really need it?
>>
>
> It should have been an unsigned long instead of an int as Linus
> suggested.  I'm not sure it's a write only variable as I think the mask
> is used to check if the interrupt occurred (I'll have to look closer).
> I'm trying now to send the fixed patch.  It only has this change:
>
> dog 74> diff -u patches/uv5_update_nmi{.v1,}
> --- patches/uv5_update_nmi.v1   2020-10-12 16:30:06.083941459 -0500
> +++ patches/uv5_update_nmi      2020-10-12 16:30:46.663903731 -0500
> @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@
>  +static unsigned long uvh_nmi_mmrx;            /*
> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1 */
>  +static unsigned long uvh_nmi_mmrx_clear;      /*
> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1_ALIAS */
>  +static int uvh_nmi_mmrx_shift;                        /*
> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1_EXTIO_INT0_SHFT */
> -+static int uvh_nmi_mmrx_mask;                 /*
> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1_EXTIO_INT0_MASK */
> ++static unsigned long uvh_nmi_mmrx_mask;               /*
> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1_EXTIO_INT0_MASK */
>  +static char *uvh_nmi_mmrx_type;                       /* "EXTIO_INT0" */
>  +
>  +/* Non-zero indicates newer SMM NMI handler present */
>
> (or quoted)
>
>> dog 74> diff -u patches/uv5_update_nmi{.v1,}
>> --- patches/uv5_update_nmi.v1   2020-10-12 16:30:06.083941459 -0500
>> +++ patches/uv5_update_nmi      2020-10-12 16:30:46.663903731 -0500
>> @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@
>>  +static unsigned long uvh_nmi_mmrx;            /*
>> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1 */
>>  +static unsigned long uvh_nmi_mmrx_clear;      /*
>> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1_ALIAS */
>>  +static int uvh_nmi_mmrx_shift;                        /*
>> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1_EXTIO_INT0_SHFT */
>> -+static int uvh_nmi_mmrx_mask;                 /*
>> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1_EXTIO_INT0_MASK */
>> ++static unsigned long uvh_nmi_mmrx_mask;               /*
>> UVH_EVENT_OCCURRED0/1_EXTIO_INT0_MASK */
>>  +static char *uvh_nmi_mmrx_type;                       /*
>> "EXTIO_INT0" */
>>  +
>>  +/* Non-zero indicates newer SMM NMI handler present */

I was in the process of tracing it through and perhaps it does need a
bit more analysis to be correct. What does it mean to send a patch to
fix the compile error, just remove it?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-12 23:58    [W:0.084 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site