linux-kernel - Re: Recoverable MCA interrupts from NMI handlers? IPMI and RCU?

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]

Message-ID: <4849D059.1000701@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 06 Jun 2008 17:03:37 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>
CC:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, dvhltc@...ibm.com,
	niv@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: Recoverable MCA interrupts from NMI handlers?  IPMI and RCU?

Corey Minyard wrote:
> If you mean the IPMI driver, it does not tie into any SMI.  It 
> theoretically could since there's a bit for that in the watchdog timer, 
> but there's been no demand and I haven't looked at it.  I guess it would 
> be better than an NMI.
> 
> If it did tie in, it would most likely just panic to get useful 
> information out before the watchdog reset the system.

The main reason I could see wanting to use SMI would be as a debugging 
tool, since SMI makes the entire state of the system available at a low 
level; however, trying to interact with the state of the kernel at this 
priority level seems beyond the pale in terms of complexity.

	-hpa
--
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/