On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 02:55:31PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:15:30PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > einj.c: it's about the 3rd separate 'error injection' concept that got > > > > > > introduced ... > > > > > > > > > > EINJ is a true platform feature, not just software feature. We need to support > > > > > it to debug various hardware error features. > > > > > > > > Also having multiple error injecting interfaces is a good thing. > > > > > > It's never a good thing to have separate, vendor dependent interfaces for what > > > to the user is basically the same conceptual thing! > > > > Perhaps a simple example (simplified, in practice there are more complications) > > makes it more clear: > > > > The memory error handler does different actions depending on what the state the > > page the error is happening on is in. > > What you appear to be arguing for is the ability to inject different types of > events. Different events in different contexts with different drivers with different parameters using different tools. Commonality: about 0% exept there's "error" somewhere in the description. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
