>is there any reason to built this code modular? After all it would >usually not be loaded when it was needed. Not allowing modular mca >recovery would help greatly because it's using some symbols that we'd >prefer to unexport before chaning some implementation details >(tasklist_lock and maybe force_sig)
At the moment there are two reasons: 1) OS distributors don't trust this code very much and they seem to prefer to ship a kernel that doesn't have mca memory recovery enabled. But some do seem ok with the idea of supplying a module that a suitably knowlegable customer would load. This doesn't seem too unreasonable a position, after all memory error recovery does involve killing user applications. 2) Loading/unloading the module provides a mechanism to enable/disable memory error recovery ... so we aren't tempted to add some ugly file in /proc to do this. Neither of these are really strong long-term arguments, but I'd prefer to keep things this way for a while longer until we can convice a few more people that this is good code to have built in as the default. -Tony - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
