Kumar Gala [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

[Xie Shaohui-B21989] Hi Alex, seems your suggestion is some kind of
conflict with Kumar, you can have a look at
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/67774/

=20
I think Alex's comment is the fact we ignore the 'return' value in the

machine_check_e500 case.

Yes, this one and plus the fact that Mchk exception messages are printed
even if it was handled successfully (by RIO handler). Messages are
printed in both: e500 and e500mc handlers.

Alex.
 =20