lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 06:24:14 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> Cc: huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, "Wu, Fengguang" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] HWPoison: add memory_failure_queue() * Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote: > On 05/24/2011 10:48 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote: > > > >>>> - How to deal with ring-buffer overflow? For example, there is full of > >>>> corrected memory error in ring-buffer, and now a recoverable memory error > >>>> occurs but it can not be put into perf ring buffer because of ring-buffer > >>>> overflow, how to deal with the recoverable memory error? > >>> > >>> The solution is to make it large enough. With *every* queueing solution there > >>> will be some sort of queue size limit. > >> > >> Another solution could be: > >> > >> Create two ring-buffer. One is for logging and will be read by RAS > >> daemon; the other is for recovering, the event record will be removed > >> from the ring-buffer after all 'active filters' have been run on it. > >> Even RAS daemon being restarted or hang, recoverable error can be taken > >> cared of. > > > > Well, filters will always be executed since they execute when the event is > > inserted - not when it's extracted. > > For filters executed in NMI context, they can be executed when the event > is inserted, no need for buffering. But for filters executed in > deferred IRQ context, they need to be executed when event's extracted. Correct. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists