[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AE951F4.7080406@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:27:32 +0900
From: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, mce: short output of MCE banks ownership information
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> Maybe there would be more desirable ways, but I think that "compress
>> messages shorter to bear heavy repeating" will be a good way at this
>> time.
>
> We really want to only print out relevant information. 128 lines of
> identical output is not relevant. (or 2x 64 lines, or 4096 lines of
> identical output)
>
> So we only want to print MCE setup messages on the boot CPU. That gives
> us 90% of the benefits already: we see the rough structure of the
> hardware, and if the bootup has a problem with MCE initialization we get
> relevant printouts that helps debugging.
>
> Now, it's certainly true that with things like MCE bank sharing the MCE
> setup output from different CPUs might not be identical all the time -
> but the information is represented in other (topology) info anyway. (and
> if not it wasnt all that important to begin with)
>
> For non-boot CPUs we can perhaps add a mce=verbose (default-disabled)
> mode of bootup that allows all CPUs to be printed - should there be any
> problem with MCE details only visible on non-boot CPUs. (unlikely)
How about having a kind of "boot=quiet_ap" which suppress boot-time messages
for all non-boot CPUs, rather than "mce=verbose" which only suppress one
(or, with thermal message, two) line? I don't not understand why this problem
would be solved only by removing the lines from mce subsystem.
I have no problem on my box with 16 CPUs, but I would not think so if there
were 128 or 4096. Then I'd like to see in short:
:
2048 CPUs available, 4096 CPUs total
Booting 2047 processors ........<snip>..... OK.
Total of 2048 processors activated (XXXXXXXXXXX.XX BogoMIPS).
:
Anyway this will be a quite trivial problem for desktop/notebook users.
Thanks,
H.Seto
--
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