* Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > (2011/05/22 19:00), Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> How to do hardware error recovering in your perf framework? IMHO, it can be > >> something as follow: > >> > >> - NMI handler run for the hardware error, where hardware error > >> information is collected and put into a ring buffer, an irq_work is > >> triggered for further work > >> - In irq_work handler, memory_failure_queue() is called to do the real > >> recovering work for recoverable memory error in ring buffer. > >> > >> What's your idea about hardware error recovering in perf? > > > > The first step, the whole irq_work and ring buffer already looks largely > > duplicated: you can collect into a perf event ring-buffer from NMI context like > > the regular perf events do. > > > > The generalization that *would* make sense is not at the irq_work level really, > > instead we could generalize a 'struct event' for kernel internal producers and > > consumers of events that have no explicit PMU connection. > > > > This new 'struct event' would be slimmer and would only contain the fields and > > features that generic event consumers and producers need. Tracing events could > > be updated to use these kinds of slimmer events. > > > > It would still plug nicely into existing event ABIs, would work with event > > filters, etc. so the tooling side would remain focused and unified. > > > > Something like that. It is rather clear by now that splitting out irq_work was > > a mistake. But mistakes can be fixed and some really nice code could come out > > of it! Would you be interested in looking into this? > > Err...? > > Then is it better to write some nice code and throw away the following patch? No, i think your patch is already a pretty nice simplification of the MCE code - using irq_work is obviously better than the open-coded MCE vector approach! These are exactly the kind of small steps towards generalizations that i wanted to see: each step without being intrusive and breaking stuff and working towards improving the status quo. Thanks, Ingo -- 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
