[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F31C9F32B@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 18:01:33 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"gong.chen@...ux.intel.com" <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "bp@...e.de" <bp@...e.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: Pay no attention to 'F' bit in MCACOD when
parsing 'UC' errors.
MCESEV(
+ PANIC, "Action required but kernel thread is not continuable",
+ SER, MASK(MCI_STATUS_OVER|MCI_UC_SAR|MCI_ADDR, MCI_UC_SAR|MCI_ADDR),
+ MCGMASK(MCG_STATUS_RIPV|MCG_STATUS_EIPV, MCG_STATUS_RIPV|MCG_STATUS_EIPV),
+ KERNEL
+ ),
+ MCESEV(
AR, "Action required: data load error in a user process",
SER, MASK(MCI_STATUS_OVER|MCI_UC_SAR|MCI_ADDR|MCACOD, MCI_UC_SAR|MCI_ADDR|MCACOD_DATA),
USER
This just gives us a better panic message. Right? Without this we'd keep walking the
severity table until we hit the "Action required: unknown MCACOD" entry which will
match and force a panic anyway.
So I might look for better wording. As far as the h/w is concerned the thread is continuable.
Linux is just not smart enough (yet) to take the required recovery action.
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists