lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/6] HWPOISON: clean up memory_failure() vs. __memory_failure()

    * Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:

    > > > > printk(KERN_ERR "Action optional memory failure at %lx ignored\n", pfn);
    > > >
    > > > Btw., while at it, could we phrase this message in a more
    > > > obvious way to users, such as 'Non-fatal memory failure at
    > > > %lx ignored'?
    > >
    > > Yeah, that's might not be as correct as we want it to be. AO
    > > means it is an uncorrectable error, i.e. it will become fatal
    > > if we'd consumed it, but it isn't that now because we just saw
    > > it passing by in the cacheline...
    > >
    > > Maybe "Fatal, unconsumed error ignored..."
    >
    > The overall meaning is "land mine seen but not stepped on yet"

    Perfect message!

    Thanks,

    Ingo


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-12-15 07:49    [W:3.252 / U:0.220 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site