Re: [PATCH 1/6] HWPOISON: clean up memory_failure() vs.__memory_failure()

[Ingo Molnar]

* Luck, Tony <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > > >  	printk(KERN_ERR "Action optional memory failure at %lx ignored\n", pfn);
> > > 
> > > Btw., while at it, could we phrase this message in a more 
> > > obvious way to users, such as 'Non-fatal memory failure at 
> > > %lx ignored'?
> > 
> > Yeah, that's might not be as correct as we want it to be. AO 
> > means it is an uncorrectable error, i.e. it will become fatal 
> > if we'd consumed it, but it isn't that now because we just saw 
> > it passing by in the cacheline...
> > 
> > Maybe "Fatal, unconsumed error ignored..."
> 
> The overall meaning is "land mine seen but not stepped on yet"

Perfect message!

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/