RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] xen/mce: Add mcelog support for Xenplatform (v2)

[Liu, Jinsong]

Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>>>>> -static struct miscdevice mce_chrdev_device = {
>>>>>> +struct miscdevice mce_chrdev_device = {
>>>>>>  	MISC_MCELOG_MINOR,
>>>>>>  	"mcelog",
>>>>>>  	&mce_chrdev_ops,
>>>>> 
>>>>> You're still reusing those - pls, define your own 'struct
>>>>> miscdevice mce_chrdev_device' in drivers/xen/ or somewhere
>>>>> convenient and 
>>>>> your own mce_chrdev_ops. The only thing you should be touching in
>>>>> arch/x86/.../mcheck/ is the export of MISC_MCELOG_MINOR.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>> 
>>>> I'm *not* reuse native code.
>>>> I have defined 'struct miscdevice xen_mce_chrdev_device' in
>>>> drivers/xen, and I also implement xen_mce_chrdev_ops, they are all
>>>> xen-self-contained. 
>>>> 
>>>> The patch just redirect native mce_chrdev_device to
>>>> xen_mce_chrdev_device when running under xen environment.
>>>> It didn't change any native code (except just cancel
>>>> mce_chrdev_device 'static'), and will not break native logic.
>>> 
>>> Why are you doing that?
>>> 
>>> Why don't you do
>>> 
>>> 	misc_register(&xen_mce_chrdev_device);
>>> 
>>> in xen_early_init_mcelog() ?
>>> 
>>> This way there'll be no arch/x86/ dependencies at all.
>> 
>> The reason is, if we do so, it would be covered by native
>> misc_register(&mce_chrdev_device) later when native kernel init (xen
>> init first and then start native kernel).  
> 
> Won't the second registration (so the original one) of the major
> fail? So the mce_log would just error out since somebody already
> registered? 

No, that would be device confliction, the 2nd register return as -EBUSY and un-predicetable result.
I test it in your way, mcelog fail to fetch any error log.

Thanks,
Jinsong--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/