linux-kernel - Re: [tip:x86/mce] x86, mce: Make xeon75xx memory driver dependent on PCI

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: <4B7B1C40.8070208@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Feb 2010 23:29:20 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	andi@...stfloor.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
	Doug Thompson <dougthompson@...ssion.com>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/mce] x86, mce: Make xeon75xx memory driver dependent
 on PCI

>
> Please work with Mauro on the Nehalem EDAC bits, they seem rather advanced to
> me for v2.6.34, and _far_ cleaner and more capable as well. See those Intel
> support bits at:

Hi Ingo,

core_i7 and EDAC has nothing to do with this code and
it has nothing to do with the problem this patch is
solving.

This is for a different chip (xeon75xx)
which has a completely different memory subsystem
and reports memory errors in a completely different way
than xeon75xx/core_i7.

For core_i7/xeon55xx there is no additional event interface needed;
it's all supplied by the hardware on the existing interfaces.

The point of this code is to annotate the CE events on Xeon 75xx
and to implement specific backend actions (page offlining, triggers)
based on specific events. These backend actions are already implemented
on 55xx without additional changes (no need for EDAC)

EDAC does not provide an event interface that can
be polled, just counts, so this cannot be done with EDAC.
It's simply a topology enumeration with error counts.
mcelog is not a topology interface, it's a event
notification mechanism.

EDAC and mcelog are orthogonal, they don't solve the same
problem.

So your nack is based on incorrect assumptions and doesn't make
sense. What you're asking for cannot be done with current
EDAC as far as I know.

-Andi
--
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/