Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] tools/xen-mceinj: support AMD

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 31.05.13 at 13:31, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Egger, Christoph wrote:
>> @@ -44,11 +47,14 @@
>>  #define MCi_type_STATUS     0x1
>>  #define MCi_type_ADDR       0x2
>>  #define MCi_type_MISC       0x3
>> -#define MCi_type_CTL2       0x4
>> +#define MC4_type_MISC1      0x4
>> +#define MC4_type_MISC2      0x5
>> +#define MC4_type_MISC3      0x6
>> +#define MCi_type_CTL2       0x7
> 
> Why change original sequence? I didn't see the necessity of doing so --> 
> please 
> add new types behind old ones so that we don't need test old logic again.

Actually I think I'm with Christoph here - keeping the MSIC ones
together makes more sense than having unmanageable mixture of
things in arbitrary order.

If the original code was written half way properly, then I also don't
see any re-testing need - there shouldn't be any dependencies on
the particular values these symbols have (after all that's what they
were - supposedly - introduced for).

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel