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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <49DECD2F.6060708@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:38:07 +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:
>> Following is a proposal version. Maybe dividing it into 2 pieces, function
>> improvement and MSR definition, would be a good idea.
> 
> I don't think we need the full MSR definitions right now, at least 
> I don't have any plans to support them. After all current CPUs
> don't.
> 
> The rest looks good.

Thanks.

I still believe that using MSR which only available on 32bit from 64bit
code is not right thing.  However this is not logical bug, and adding
definition is not suitable for 2.6.30.  I'd like to defer the MSR part
to the next time.

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.

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/