RE: [patch] Memory Error Handling Improvement

From: Luck, Tony <>
Date: 2005-06-25 07:20:17
>Fine, but what about stores?

Stores have too many extra levels of buffering to have much hope.  But just
because we can't help the store case doesn't mean that we shouldn't do
something about the load case.

>Furthermore, there are many ways to enter the kernel, so it still
>makes no sense to me to consider external interrupts only.  System
>calls for one are certainly quite common, too.

Agreed.  It would be much better if we had some clean & easy way to tag
all of the kernel entry sequences for a check like this.  The cost of
checking to see whether we are in any of these code regions could be
quite high ... but we only pay it if there is an error, so as long as
it isn't outrageous it should be okay.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Received on Fri Jun 24 17:31:03 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:40 EST