linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [3/4] x86: MCE: Improve mce_get

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:49:26 +0900
From:	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC:	ying.huang@...el.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [3/4] x86: MCE: Improve mce_get_rip

Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 01:38:07PM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
>> I still believe that using MSR which only available on 32bit from 64bit
> 
> The MSR is available on 64bit too (there are 64bit capable P4s
> like Prescott or Smithfield) 

The problem is the name which the MSR locating address 189H has.
Do you mind if I put this topic on the back-burner?

>> BTW, since this patch is "Improve", I think you need to clarify why you
>> bind it into the "bugfix" patch set for 2.6.30.  If there are known bug,
>> please describe about it.
> 
> It reports the incorrect RIP, fixing one of the test cases in the 
> MCE regression test suite.

Why is it incorrect?  In what case, what result is expected because why,
and how this patch fix it?


Thanks,
H.Seto

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