[lkml]   [2011]   [May]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC 0/9] mce recovery for Sandy Bridge server
    On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 05:40:23AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > So we *really* want to promote this code to a higher level of abstraction.
    > Everyone would benefit from doing that: Intel hardware error handling features
    > would be enabled much more richly and i suspect they would also be *used* in a
    > much more meaningful way - driving the hw cycle as well.

    Absolutely agreed. The RAS architecture should look like this, IMHO:

    I. Event collection: #MC handler and pollers, no queueing or buffering crap.

    II. Pluggable and extensible filters which are
    * per vendor
    * configurable from userspace
    * easily extensible
    * decide whether action should be taken in the kernel or error is non-critical
    and should go to RAS daemon

    III. Error handling callback(s)
    * also extensible
    * also per vendor
    * also configurable from userspace

    * reuse perf code - no need for ad-hoc new buffers and lockless thingies when we
    have it all already

    * easy code and even hw testing with perf inject or ras inject
    ** this gives us also the different injection methods per vendor in an unified
    way instead of interfaces in /sys or debugfs or mcelog or ...

    * keep code design sane instead of letting it needlessly fiddle with
    other parts of the kernel

    * ...

    Now I should better go and put my patches where my mouth is :).


     \ /
      Last update: 2011-05-24 10:17    [W:0.023 / U:3.716 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site