On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 12:44 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Fri, 21 Jul 2017 15:34:50 +0000
> "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx> escreveu:
>
> > On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 17:13 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 03:08:41PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu
> > > wrote:
> > > > Yes, that is correct. Corrected errors are reported to the OS
> > > > when they exceeded the platform's threshold.
> > >
> > > Are those thresholds user-configurable?
> >
> > I suppose it'd depend on vendors, but I do not think users can do
> > it properly unless they have depth knowledge about the hardware.
> >
> > > If not, what are you telling users who want to see *every*
> > > corrected error for measuring DIMM wear and so on...?
> >
> > Corrected errors are normal and expected to occur on healthy
> > hardware. They do not need user's attention until they repeatedly
> > occurred at a same place.
>
> Yes, they're expected to happen. Still, some sys admins have their
> own measurements about what's "normal" for their scenario, and want
> to monitor every single corrected error, running their own
> algorithm to warn if the number of corrected errors is above their
> "normal" rate.
I suppose these admins had to do it because their platforms reported
all corrected errors. It addresses such administrators' burden.
Thanks,
-Toshi
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
