From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Mosberger Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:24:05 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH, 1/4] readX_check() performance evaluation Message-Id: <16408.3157.336306.812481@napali.hpl.hp.com> List-Id: References: <00a201c3e541$c0e7d680$2987110a@lsd.css.fujitsu.com> <20040128172004.GB5494@cup.hp.com> <20040128184137.616b6425.ak@suse.de> <16408.30.896895.980121@napali.hpl.hp.com> <20040128195246.47a84498.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20040128195246.47a84498.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Andi Kleen Cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com, davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com, iod00d@hp.com, ishii.hironobu@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >>>>> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:52:46 +0100, Andi Kleen said: >> I find this comment interesting. Can you elaborate what you mean by >> "slightly buggy systems"? Andi> e.g. one bit ECC errors in memory are quite common. And with Andi> ECC memory they are not really fatal. Yet they are a good indicator that something is wrong (not performing properly) or may be failing soon. I don't think putting on blinders for such problems is a good idea. Though I agree that the question of how to report such things without needlessly alerting Joe Clueless is an interesting challenge. --david