Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1757624Ab3DQFau (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 17 Apr 2013 01:30:50 -0400
Received: from mail-ia0-f177.google.com ([209.85.210.177]:34370 "EHLO
	mail-ia0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754486Ab3DQFat (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 17 Apr 2013 01:30:49 -0400
Message-ID: <516E3383.5060105@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 13:30:43 +0800
From: Simon Jeons <simon.jeons@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
CC: Mitsuhiro Tanino <mitsuhiro.tanino.gm@hitachi.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 0/2] mm: Add parameters to make kernel behavior at
 memory error on dirty cache selectable
References: <51662D5B.3050001@hitachi.com> <20130411134915.GH16732@two.firstfloor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130411134915.GH16732@two.firstfloor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2423
Lines: 59

On 04/11/2013 09:49 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> As a result, if the dirty cache includes user data, the data is lost,
>> and data corruption occurs if an application uses old data.

Hi Andi,

Could you give me the link of your mce testcase?

> The application cannot use old data, the kernel code kills it if it
> would do that. And if it's IO data there is an EIO triggered.
>
> iirc the only concern in the past was that the application may miss
> the asynchronous EIO because it's cleared on any fd access.
>
> This is a general problem not specific to memory error handling,
> as these asynchronous IO errors can happen due to other reason
> (bad disk etc.)
>
> If you're really concerned about this case I think the solution
> is to make the EIO more sticky so that there is a higher chance
> than it gets returned.  This will make your data much more safe,
> as it will cover all kinds of IO errors, not just the obscure memory
> errors.
>
> Or maybe have a panic knob on any IO error for any case if you don't
> trust your application to check IO syscalls. But I would rather
> have better EIO reporting than just giving up like this.
>
> The problem of tying it just to any dirty data for memory errors
> is that most anonymous data is dirty and it doesn't have this problem
> at all (because the signals handle this and they cannot be lost)
>
> And that is a far more common case than this relatively unlikely
> case of dirty IO data.
>
> So just doing it for "dirty" is not the right knob.
>
> Basically I'm saying if you worry about unreliable IO error reporting
> fix IO error reporting, don't add random unnecessary panics to
> the memory error handling.
>
> BTW my suspicion is that if you approach this from a data driven
> perspective: that is measure how much such dirty data is typically
> around in comparison to other data it will be unlikely. Such
> a study can be done with the "page-types" program in tools/vm
>
> -Andi
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

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