lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH -v10 0/4] Lock-less list
From
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > But will all that stuff be accepted? Please stop sending infrastructure bits and
>> > focus on your larger RAS picture, once you have consensus on that from all
>> > parties involved, then, and only then, does it make sense to submit everything,
>> > including infrastructure.
>>
>> I am not sending hardware error reporting infrastructure.  As far as I know, Linus
>> and Andrew suggest to use printk for hardware error reporting.  And now, I just
>> try to write APEI driver and reporting hardware error with printk.  Is it
>> acceptable?  Do you have some other idea about hardware error reporting?
>
> Erm, how could you possible have missed the perf based RAS daemon work of Boris,
> which we've pointed out about half a dozen times already?

Even if there is some other hardware error reporting infrastructure
such as perf based, I think we still need printk too. After all, as
Linus pointed out, printk is the most popular error reporting
mechanism so far. Do you think so?

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-20 13:51    [W:0.082 / U:6.988 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site