On 8/28/2025 3:57 AM, Alejandro Lucero Palau wrote: > On 8/27/25 02:35, Terry Bowman wrote: >> Restricted CXL Host (RCH) protocol error handling uses a procedure distinct >> from the CXL Virtual Hierarchy (VH) handling. This is because of the >> differences in the RCH and VH topologies. Improve the maintainability and >> add ability to enable/disable RCH handling. >> >> Move and combine the RCH handling code into a single block conditionally >> compiled with the CONFIG_CXL_RCH_RAS kernel config. >> >> Signed-off-by: Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@xxxxxxx> >> >> --- >> v10->v11: >> - New patch >> --- >> drivers/cxl/core/ras.c | 175 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- >> 1 file changed, 90 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/ras.c b/drivers/cxl/core/ras.c >> index 0875ce8116ff..f42f9a255ef8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/ras.c >> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/ras.c >> @@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ void cxl_ras_exit(void) >> cancel_work_sync(&cxl_cper_prot_err_work); >> } >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_CXL_RCH_RAS > > You are introducing CONFIG_CXL_RCH_RAS in the next patch. Is it correct > to use it here? > You are correct. I need to move the introduction of Kconfig's CONFIG_CXL_RCH_RAS definition into this patch. Thanks. Terry
