From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] HWPoison: add memory_failure_queue()
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 04:48:48 +0200
Message-ID: <20110524024848.GA25230@elte.hu>
References: <20110517092620.GI22093@elte.hu>
 <4DD31C78.6000209@intel.com>
 <20110520115614.GH14745@elte.hu>
 <BANLkTi=5Y0fqsmhsoPm8si=nQBc-tCwtrw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110522100021.GA28177@elte.hu>
 <BANLkTi=VDQMOfWe5tP7nXSv2AEsiUUEteg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110522132515.GA13078@elte.hu>
 <4DD9C8B9.5070004@intel.com>
 <20110523110151.GD24674@elte.hu>
 <4DDB1396.7050205@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:38270 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752516Ab1EXCwO (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 23 May 2011 22:52:14 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4DDB1396.7050205@intel.com>
Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, "Wu, Fengguang" <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>


* Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> 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.

So if you worry about losing *filter* executions (and dependent policy action) 
- there should be no loss there, ever.

But yes, the scheme you outline would work as well: a counting-only event with 
a filter specified - this will do no buffering at all.

So ... to get the ball rolling in this area one of you guys active in RAS 
should really try a first approximation for the active filter approach: add a 
test-TRACE_EVENT() for the errors you are interested in and define a convenient 
way to register policy action with post-filter events. This should work even 
without having the 'active' portion defined at the ABI and filter-string level.

Thanks,

	Ingo