Re: [PATCH] x86_64: dynamic MCE poll interval

[Tim Hockin]

On 27 Apr 2007 19:02:30 +0200, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 09:58:14AM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > On 27 Apr 2007 11:09:17 +0200, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > >On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 06:02:52PM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > >> Description:
> > >>  This patch makes the MCE poller adjust the polling interval dynamically.
> > >>  If we find an MCE, poll 2x faster (down to 10 ms).  When we stop finding
> > >>  MCEs, poll 2x slower (up to check_interval seconds).  The check_interval
> > >>  tunable becomes the max polling interval.
> > >
> > >Can you please fix the documentation then?
> >
> > Which documentation, specifically? :)
>
> Documentation/x86_64/{boot-options.txt,machinecheck}

What needs to be changed in boot-options?


> >
> > >> Result:
> > >>  If you start to take a lot of correctable errors (not exceptions), you
> > >>  log them faster and more accurately (less chance of overflowing the MCA
> > >>  registers).  If you don't take a lot of errors, you will see no change.
> > >
> > >Makes sense.
> > >
> > >AMD RevF can do this using the threshold interrupts too for DIMM errors
> > >too without any delays -- perhaps it would also make sense to configure
> > >this by default that it always triggers on all DIMM errors.
> > >Right now it is just an option in /sys
> >
> > Can I look at this as a followon patch?  I have a number of mce
>
> Sure.
>
> -Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/