[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0904271026140.24293@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:27:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
cc: Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: Re-implement MCE log ring buffer as per-CPU ring buffer
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Huang Ying wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 21:36 +0800, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Apr 2009, Robert Richter wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It seems that ring_buffer is not NMI-safe, while mcelog buffer will be
> > > > used in NMI context and interrupt context. When will ring_buffer to be
> > > > NMI-safe?
> > >
> > > You can use it in nmi context with separate read and write
> > > buffers. See this patch description:
> > > 6dad828b76c7224a22ddc9ce7aa495d994f03b31
> > >
> > > Not sure if somebody will make the ring_buffer non-locking.
> >
> > It already is ;-)
> >
> > I've put in for a patent application on the algorithm so I must wait till
> > it is processed before I can release the code.
>
> When will it be merged by mainline kernel? Do you have a plan?
>
> We do have some scalability issues of current mcelog implementation, and
> hopes that can be solved as soon as possible, perhaps for 2.6.31?
Yes, I plan on being able to post it before the 31 merge window opens.
I'll ping the lawyer to expedite the process.
-- Steve
--
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