[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <987664A83D2D224EAE907B061CE93D5301D5DAB84D@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 09:44:10 -0700
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC 0/9] mce recovery for Sandy Bridge server
> How about separating stuffs in:
> step1) Add support for AR in user space :
> - send sigbus to affected processes, poison affected memory
> - panic if error is in kernel
> step2) Add support for AR in kernel
> - some new notify/handle mechanism etc.
>
> It seems too big jump for me.
Agreed - we can go step by step with different recovery cases. Deciding
which to implement is a classic benefit vs. effort trade off.
For each case determine some ball-park numbers for the percentage of
memory that will be in the state you wish to recover (hence user-mode
scores very highly because most people buy machines to run applications,
though there are some exceptions like file servers).
Determine the effort and invasiveness of a solution to recover - here
it is clear that a way to handle arbitrary kernel memory corruption
is never going to fly - but there is hope for some simple cases like
copy to/from user (that already are specially tagged so that user level
page faults can be processed).
-Tony
--
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