mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Tim Hockin" <thockin@gmail.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: "Andi Kleen" <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	priyankag@google.com, "Aaron Durbin" <adurbin@gmail.com>,
	"Duncan Laurie" <dlaurie@google.com>
Subject: Re: x86/mce merge, integration hickup + crash, design thoughts
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:02:51 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b3ece790901121402k4e84f8e7k7993b5fda90456cb@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081227155019.GA15493@elte.hu>

On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 7:50 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> We really need to get rid of /dev/mcelog. It's a quirky binary logging
> facility not available on 32-bit on current kernels and it has a couple of
> limitations:

It's not quirky, it's structured.  Until and unless there is a better,
structured interface, this needs to stay.

>  - it squeezes all MCE errors from the whole system into a small,
>    32-entry ringbuffer.

Yes 32 is small, but not really a big problem in practice.  The MCE daemon
(http://mcedaemon.googlecode.com) goes a long way towards making this
a non-issue.  Every distro should ship mced.

>  - it puts all the MCE logging info into an intermediary binary log
>    record format: 'struct mce' - just for userspace to in essence
>    printf out those entries with minimal post-processing. The fact that
>    we squeeze all information into a fixed-size binary record makes it
>    hard to extend and complicates the code needlessly.

This is not true, we do EXTENSIVE post-processing of MCEs.  Yes it is hard
to extend, but that's not the same as saying it is useless.

>  - these design aspects are also quite harmful to usability: by
>    default all MCEs are fatal currently (pre-Nehalem anyway), so
>    /dev/mcelog will only be used if a user goes out on a limb to
>    configure it and sets the tolerant flag.

Not true.  The vast vast vast majority of MCEs are corrected, as per our
experience, and I suspect we've got more experience with MCEs than just
about any other consumer.

> A far more useful design for handling MCE events would be to feed them
> into printk logging. So instead of printing such rather cryptic error
> messages:
>
>   MCE 0
>   HARDWARE ERROR. This is *NOT* a software problem!
>   Please contact your hardware vendor
>   CPU 0 BANK 6 MISC 202d ADDR ffeef740
>   This is not a software problem!
>   Run through mcelog --ascii to decode and contact your hardware vendor
>
> and expecting people to run mcelog, we should print plain-text something
> like:
>
>   MCE 0
>   HARDWARE ERROR. This is *NOT* a software problem!
>   Please contact your hardware vendor
>   CPU 1 4 northbridge TSC 89a560bb249
>   ADDR 1dfa49690
>     Northbridge Chipkill ECC error
>     Chipkill ECC syndrome = 2021
>          bit46 = corrected ecc error
>     bus error 'local node response, request didn't time out
>         generic read mem transaction
>         memory access, level generic'
>   STATUS 9410c00020080a13 MCGSTATUS 0

NO!  This moves in the completely wrong direction.  This output is just
about impossible to parse sanely.  And don't get me started about how much
of a pain it is to encode all of the vendor-centric and per-platform
specifics so that it decodes all the useful bits.

I promise you that there are things that are useful to us that the kernel
will not parse and print.

> straight from the kernel. This means that the MCEs will make a lot more
> sense at a glance - and the user can figure out the suspected trouble
> area, without having to find some other box to run mcelog on, etc. We can
> eliminate the user-space mcelog utility/daemon component altogether - it
> buys us little but needless complexity and inflexibility.

I disagree totally.  Putting the logic for decoding MCEs into the kernel
adds a large amount of complex, hard to maintain code precisely where it
is most destructive.  Any sort of decoding of this data in-kernel is
probably a mistake (yes, I am looking at you EDAC).

It would be much cleaner to instead make the kernel really good at
publishing errors and let userspace decode them.  A naive end user won't
know the difference - they will see a message on the syslog or the
console.  Power users will be able to do better things.

> If we want to enable userspace to capture MCE events, then it must be done
> in a way that benefits the whole kernel, not just x86: a structured
> logging facility that is in essence a printk variant and is ASCII driven.

I would be fine with this (though I disagree that it *must* be ASCII).  I
don't care how the raw data comes out of the kernel, just that it is the
raw data, not some half-assedly parsed data.

> Such event sources should be discoverable, and only 'aware' printouts
> should go into this new facility (not all printks). Demultiplexing should
> be easy and well-defined.

I agree 1000% with this - it is something I have wanted for a long time,
and that some of my team are starting to look at again.

> I.e. we could use this opportunity of the MCE code unification to bring
> the code to the next level - and not prolongue to broken concepts of the
> past.

Don't dicard the past until the present can stand on it's own.  Please.

> I'd be glad to help out with any portion of this, it should be easy to
> solve and it will clearly improve the code. For .29 we could just do a raw
> printk based approach with no decoding just yet, and layer smart decoding
> and structured logging for .30.

Please leave /dev/mcelog as a CONFIG option until such time as an
appropriate replacement is *done*.  We rely on it.

Tim

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-01-12 22:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-27 15:50 Ingo Molnar
2008-12-27 22:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-29 21:41   ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-13 17:45     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-13 18:57       ` Tim Hockin
2009-01-14  9:29         ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-14 16:18           ` Tim Hockin
2009-01-14 18:05             ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-14 19:32               ` Tim Hockin
2009-01-15 22:56                 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-15 23:39                   ` Tim Hockin
2009-01-14  2:02       ` Huang Ying
2008-12-30 21:13   ` Russ Anderson
2008-12-31 13:32     ` Andi Kleen
2008-12-31 18:09       ` Russ Anderson
2008-12-29 21:51 ` Andi Kleen
2008-12-30  6:50   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-30  9:13     ` Andi Kleen
2008-12-30 21:29 ` Russ Anderson
2009-01-12 22:02 ` Tim Hockin [this message]
2009-01-13  5:02   ` Andi Kleen

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=b3ece790901121402k4e84f8e7k7993b5fda90456cb@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=thockin@gmail.com \
    --cc=adurbin@gmail.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dlaurie@google.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=priyankag@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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