mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add HW_ERR printk prefix for hardware error logging
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:18:15 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1276219095.3004.36.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100610164607.b2908334.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 07:46 +0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:35:38 +0800
> Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > This makes hardware error related log in printk log more explicit. So
> > that the users can report it to hardware vendor instead of LKML or
> > software vendor.
> > 
> 
> Spose so.  Some additional words explaining why you think this would
> result in an improved kernel would help here.  Are you seeing
> misdirected problem reports?  Are we missing out on opportunities to
> fix hardware?  What is driving for this change?  Will it bring out some
> improvement in something which you're seeing within Intel or was it
> just a random hey-lets-try-this thing?

It is said by Andi Kleen that many users report Machine Check hardware
error message as software error to him or software vendor instead of as
hardware error to hardware vendor. This does not help much for the users
to resolve their problem. So I think it is better to make the kernel
hardware error log more explicit for these users.

Best Regards,
Huang Ying



  reply	other threads:[~2010-06-11  1:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-08  6:35 Huang Ying
2010-06-10 23:46 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11  1:18   ` Huang Ying [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-05-31  8:48 Huang Ying

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1276219095.3004.36.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com \
    --to=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome