Re: [PATCH 5/9] HWPoison: add memory_failure_queue()

[Ingo Molnar]

* Huang Ying <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 05/24/2011 10:48 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Huang Ying <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >>>> - How to deal with ring-buffer overflow?  For example, there is full of 
> >>>>   corrected memory error in ring-buffer, and now a recoverable memory error 
> >>>>   occurs but it can not be put into perf ring buffer because of ring-buffer 
> >>>>   overflow, how to deal with the recoverable memory error?
> >>>
> >>> The solution is to make it large enough. With *every* queueing solution there 
> >>> will be some sort of queue size limit.
> >>
> >> Another solution could be:
> >>
> >> Create two ring-buffer. One is for logging and will be read by RAS
> >> daemon; the other is for recovering, the event record will be removed
> >> from the ring-buffer after all 'active filters' have been run on it.
> >> Even RAS daemon being restarted or hang, recoverable error can be taken
> >> cared of.
> > 
> > Well, filters will always be executed since they execute when the event is 
> > inserted - not when it's extracted.
> 
> For filters executed in NMI context, they can be executed when the event
> is inserted, no need for buffering.  But for filters executed in
> deferred IRQ context, they need to be executed when event's extracted.

Correct.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/