[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:0.114 / U:30.972 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site