Re: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express messages

["Doug Thompson" <dthompson@lnxi.com>]

On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 18:22 +0000, Dave Peterson  wrote:
> On Friday 31 March 2006 00:25, Jurgen Kramer wrote:
> > With 2.6.16 (from FC5s 2.6.16-1.2080_FC5smp) I am getting a lot of
> >
> > Mar 31 09:35:16 paragon kernel: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express B
> > Mar 31 09:35:17 paragon kernel: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express B
> > Mar 31 09:35:17 paragon kernel: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express B
> > Mar 31 09:35:18 paragon kernel: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express B
> > Mar 31 09:35:18 paragon kernel: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express B
> > Mar 31 09:35:20 paragon kernel: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express B
> > Mar 31 09:35:20 paragon kernel: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express B
> > Mar 31 09:35:39 paragon kernel: Non-Fatal Error PCI Express B
> >
> > messages which presumably come from
> >
> > Mar 31 09:17:15 paragon kernel: MC: drivers/edac/edac_mc.c version
> > edac_mc  Ver: 2.0.0 Mar 28 2006
> > Mar 31 09:17:15 paragon kernel: EDAC MC0: Giving out device to
> > "e752x_edac" E7525: PCI 0000:00:00.0
> >
> > Is there really something broken here of just a noisy driver?
> >
> > BTW this is on a Asus NCT-D mobo with Intel E7525 chipset.
> >
> > Jurgen
> 
> Hi Jurgen,
> 
> I haven't seen this particular error before, and I can't say for sure
> whether it's a genuine problem that should be dealt with or just a
> minor annoyance that can be safely ignored.  EDAC is a relatively new
> piece of code, and still very much a work in progress.  If this is in
> fact a benign type of error, EDAC should provide a mechanism by which
> a sysadmin can silence it.  This is an area of future work.
> 
> I'm forwarding your message to the bluesmoke mailing list just in
> case anyone who reads that list has seen instances of this error in
> the past and can provide more info on it.
> 
> Dave

It is benign, just too verbose. It needs to be silenced.

The code takes the error status from the chip. That status can contain
true BAD errors and non-fatal status. The code is generic in nature and
does not special case the non-fatal error status.

this does need looking into.

doug t