Re: [PATCH] [13/16] HWPOISON: The high level memory error handlerin the VM v5
From: Wu Fengguang
Date: Wed Jun 10 2009 - 05:20:27 EST
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 04:59:39PM +0800, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 04:38:03PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:05:53AM +0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > I think a much more sensible approach would be to follow the page
> > > migration technique of replacing the page's ptes by a special swap-like
> > > entry, then do the killing from do_swap_page() if a process actually
> > > tries to access the page.
> > We call that "late kill" and will be enabled when
> > sysctl_memory_failure_early_kill=0. Its default value is 1.
> What's the use of this? What are the tradeoffs, in what situations
> should an admin set this sysctl one way or the other?
My understanding is, when an application is generating data A, B, C in
sequence, and A is found to be corrupted by the kernel. Does it make
sense for the application to continue generate B and C? Or, are there
data dependencies between them? With late kill, it becomes more likely
that the disk contain new versions of B/C and old version of A, so
will more likely create data inconsistency.
So early kill is more safe.
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/