| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 13:48:53 +0000 From: Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> To: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21 > Well it's a technical issue -- it conflicts with the machine check > code that is already implemented by stealing away its events. > You would first need a CONFIG_MCE=n on x86-64 at least, otherwise > one of them will be unhappy. That is a fair point, albeit after far too long sitting stuck in the tree. I'll have a look into this a bit further, probably MCE_K8 should feed off the output of the MCE driver. > The other issue is that the existing code does everything EDAC > K8 does already perfectly fine, just in a small fraction of > the code. Which is false. It provided a totally inconsistent interface to user space, while the EDAC layer provides the consistency many people need and want. Also unless it has changed remarkably the MCE driver doesn't do scrubbing which is needed in software on some chip revisions. The MCE driver is small, neat, incomplete for some cases and different to all the other platforms as they use off CPU memory controllers. Its ideal for a lot of uses but not big enterprise systems. Thats why we need both. Alan - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists