linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the edac-amd tree with the edac tree

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 1 Dec 2016 14:57:54 -0500
From:   Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the edac-amd tree with the edac tree

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 07:15:01PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 11:02:04AM -0500, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> > A deferred error is an uncorrectable error whose handling can be
> > deferred, i.e. it's not urgent. This affects the system behavior, but
> > I'm now thinking that this shouldn't affect users' behavior. I think it
> > would be simpler to just classify deferred errors as uncorrectable
> > errors so that users treat them as such.
> 
> Why would we want to lie about deferred errors being uncorrectable?
>

They are uncorrectable errors that can be handled differently. If you
can't handle them then there's not much difference.
 
> And I believe deferred errors can be handled differently like freeze the
> process using the page instead of killing it. And so on...
> 

If deferred errors can be handled differently in userspace, then you're
right we should maintain the distinction. I was thinking we'd only
handle them in the kernel.

> Why aren't you simply adding the documentation about
> HW_EVENT_ERR_DEFERRED and be done with it? The downstream path like
> tracepoint and all can handle all that just fine.
> 

Okay, will do.

> > Boris,
> > Can we drop or revert commit d12a969ebbfc?
> 
> No can do. It is a public branch and there's no touching it.
> 

Okay, got it.

Thanks,
Yazen