linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v10 0/4] Lock-less list

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AANLkTikv3h_QoHs4uj6CNJdC7tb_-e0osKa47KWEJvFV@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:49:23 +0800
From:	huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v10 0/4] Lock-less list

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> > But will all that stuff be accepted? Please stop sending infrastructure bits and
>> > focus on your larger RAS picture, once you have consensus on that from all
>> > parties involved, then, and only then, does it make sense to submit everything,
>> > including infrastructure.
>>
>> I am not sending hardware error reporting infrastructure.  As far as I know, Linus
>> and Andrew suggest to use printk for hardware error reporting.  And now, I just
>> try to write APEI driver and reporting hardware error with printk.  Is it
>> acceptable?  Do you have some other idea about hardware error reporting?
>
> Erm, how could you possible have missed the perf based RAS daemon work of Boris,
> which we've pointed out about half a dozen times already?

Even if there is some other hardware error reporting infrastructure
such as perf based, I think we still need printk too. After all, as
Linus pointed out, printk is the most popular error reporting
mechanism so far. Do you think so?

Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
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/