lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 1/4] x86/mce: Add Zhaoxin MCE support
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 12:01:42PM +0000, Tony W Wang-oc wrote:
> + /* Checks after this one are Intel/Zhaoxin-specific: */
> + if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_INTEL &&
> + boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_ZHAOXIN)


Is it time to have a big cleanup on how we handle similarities
and oddities in the MCE subsystem? We've been adding ad-hoc
tests like this in random places ... and it all looks very
messy. Lines that mention x86_vendor|x86|x86_model below
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/ currently look like this:

arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/amd.c: (c->x86_model >= 0x10 && c->x86_model <= 0x2F)) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/amd.c: c->x86_model >= 0x10 && c->x86_model <= 0x2F &&
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/amd.c: } else if (c->x86 == 0x17 &&
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/amd.c: if (c->x86 == 0x15 && bank == 4) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/amd.c: if (c->x86 == 0x17 &&
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_HYGON ||
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: c->x86 > 6) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_INTEL)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL ||
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86 < 0x11 && cfg->bootlog < 0) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86 == 0x15 && c->x86_model <= 0xf)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86 == 15 && this_cpu_read(mce_num_banks) > 4) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86 != 5)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if ((c->x86 > 6 || (c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model >= 0xe)) &&
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model < 0x1A && this_cpu_read(mce_num_banks) > 0)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if ((c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model == 0xf && c->x86_stepping >= 0xe) ||
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model <= 13 && cfg->bootlog < 0)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model == 45)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86 == 6 && this_cpu_read(mce_num_banks) > 0)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD || c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_HYGON) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_UNKNOWN) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: m->cpuvendor = boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor;
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c: switch (c->x86_vendor) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/inject.c: boot_cpu_data.x86 < 0x17) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/inject.c: m->cpuvendor = boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor;
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/intel.c: if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_INTEL)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/intel.c: switch (c->x86_model) {
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c: boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_HYGON)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c: if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD ||
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/therm_throt.c: if (c->x86 == 6 && (c->x86_model == 9 || c->x86_model == 13)) {

Maybe we can X86_VENDOR_ZHAOXIN to this jumble with the excuse that
it is already so ugly that this patch series only makes things 5% worse?

Or should we make a big table of CPU vendors/families/models and use
x86_match_cpu() to pick out what are running on and set some bits/flags
(like X86_FEATURE/X86_BUG) which we can use in the code to do the
right thing in each place?

E.g. default for Intel and Zhaoxin vendors would be to set MCE_INTEL_LIKE.

Thoughts?

-Tony

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-13 20:10    [W:0.036 / U:1.860 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site