From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756825AbYJETgO (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2008 15:36:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755791AbYJETf7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2008 15:35:59 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.176]:63828 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755679AbYJETf6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2008 15:35:58 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=p7xqNrBkcRgjnPW7Hp4SoW42/QSsKmLOkcxLGedtoKOb7Lp9ZeNRssSxEma1HFFxT7 sEUOw6fk3Z74BqAj5fYDtw+JOPf2cdyRfQXSvi+kPnWV1Pr5XumpM5mb6I9cIYxAyZcV SvddEoxadvRQVt9+YhyjAG3Qyqb0dKlcllKwI= Message-ID: <19f34abd0810051235u7f21da03q324d3d0bbe110075@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 21:35:57 +0200 From: "Vegard Nossum" To: "Arjan van de Ven" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86: corruption check: run the corruption checks from a work queue Cc: mingo@elte.hu, "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20081005120903.2dc262f4@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20081005120705.02492d44@infradead.org> <20081005120903.2dc262f4@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 9:09 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > From: Arjan van de Ven > Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:42:15 -0700 > Subject: [PATCH] x86: corruption check: run the corruption checks from a work queue > > the periodic corruption checks are better off run from a work queue; there's > nothing time critical about them and this way the amount of > interrupt-context work is reduced. > > Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven Hi, Did you figure out what's causing these corruptions yet? Can't you do so by simply reserving the memory area in question, clearing the present bit for those pages, and letting the page fault handler catch whatever code is accessing it? Vegard -- "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation." -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036