[v3] Update mce_record tracepoint

[PATCH v3 0/2] Update mce_record tracepoint

Posted by Naik, Avadhut 1 year, 10 months ago

Hi Boris,

Can this patchset be merged in? Or would you prefer me sending out another
revision with Steven's "Reviewed-by:" tag?

On 2/8/2024 11:10, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 01:57:58 -0600
> Avadhut Naik <avadhut.naik@amd.com> wrote:
> 
>> This patchset updates the mce_record tracepoint so that the recently added
>> fields of struct mce are exported through it to userspace.
>>
>> The first patch adds PPIN (Protected Processor Inventory Number) field to
>> the tracepoint.
>>
>> The second patch adds the microcode field (Microcode Revision) to the
>> tracepoint.
> 
> From a tracing POV only:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> 
> -- Steve

-- 
Thanks,
Avadhut Naik

Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Update mce_record tracepoint

Posted by Borislav Petkov 1 year, 10 months ago

On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:12:14PM -0500, Naik, Avadhut wrote:
> Can this patchset be merged in? Or would you prefer me sending out
> another revision with Steven's "Reviewed-by:" tag?

First of all, please do not top-post.

Then, you were on Cc on the previous thread. Please summarize from it
and put in the commit message *why* it is good to have each field added.

And then, above the tracepoint, I'd like you to add a rule which
states what information can and should be added to the tracepoint. And
no, "just because" is not good enough. The previous thread has hints.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Update mce_record tracepoint

Posted by Naik, Avadhut 1 year, 10 months ago


On 3/25/2024 15:31, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:12:14PM -0500, Naik, Avadhut wrote:
>> Can this patchset be merged in? Or would you prefer me sending out
>> another revision with Steven's "Reviewed-by:" tag?
> 
> First of all, please do not top-post.
>
Apologies for that!
 
> Then, you were on Cc on the previous thread. Please summarize from it
> and put in the commit message *why* it is good to have each field added.
> 
> And then, above the tracepoint, I'd like you to add a rule which
> states what information can and should be added to the tracepoint. And
> no, "just because" is not good enough. The previous thread has hints.
> 

Thanks for the clarification! Will update accordingly.

> Thx.
> 

-- 
Thanks,
Avadhut Naik