Re: [RFC] Better MCA recovery on IPF

From: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi_at_jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: 2003-10-31 16:09:12
Hi, Matthias.


> I think error handling needs to be extended to not only
> recover from errors and kill for example the concerned
> application. Increasing chip density will increase the
> soft error rate, so it also becomes important to determinate
> if a error is soft (caused for example by cosmic rays)
> or if it is a true HW component failure requiring a
> replacement.

Surely, it is very important to specify where target
error comes from. I do not want to carry out advice to
replace the component, which working correctly.

> Obviously a lot of the error handling will be very
> platform dependant, but I think we should be able to come up
> with a common frame set. What do you think ?

Of course, I agree with a common frame set.
In the case of platform premising IPF, I think it is
better to regard the Intel's Chipset as the de facto
standard.


Thanks.

------

H.Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Fri Oct 31 00:14:12 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:20 EST