[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090925170006.68c2fae1@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 17:00:06 +0200
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>,
bluesmoke-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/63] edac_mce: Add an interface driver to report mce
errors via edac
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:40:38 +0200
Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 04:05:01PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:56:26 +0200
> > > > 1) edac_mce is not a module (see patch 18). So, just calling a
> > > > routine on edac_mce should be safe, even at NMI;
> > >
> > > no, I mean the ->check_error member - it could call into a module
> > > if i7core_edac is compiled as such.
> >
> > calling modular code from NMI is not a fatal event though.
>
> No, not really. However, I remember Andi raising a stability concern
> one time whether it'd be such a good idea to allow modules to hook
> into MCE critical path when the system is already unstable and about
> to panic.
module vs not does not make a difference here.
either it's good code or it's not, does not matter where it lives.
>
> Therefore, we might want to decode critical MCEs in core kernel code
> and non-critical later, at a more appropriate time (aka in modules).
>
modules are also just an artificial carve-off of the kernel, nothing
more.
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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