linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2 3/7] x86, NMI, Rename memory parity error to PCI SERR error

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]

Date:	Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:39:20 +0800
From:	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Cc:	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 3/7] x86, NMI, Rename memory parity error to PCI
 SERR error

On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 16:01 +0800, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 26.09.10 20:57:02, Huang Ying wrote:
> > memory parity error is only valid for IBM PC-AT, newer machine use 7
> > bit (0x80) of 0x61 port for PCI SERR. While memory error is usually
> > reported via MCE. So corresponding function name and kernel log string
> > is changed.
> > 
> > But on some machines, PCI SERR line is still used to report memory
> > errors. This is used by EDAC, so corresponding EDAC call is reserved.
> > 
> > 
> > v2:
> > 
> > - EDAC call in pci_serr_error is reserved.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/include/asm/mach_traps.h |    6 +++---
> >  arch/x86/kernel/traps.c           |   21 ++++++++++-----------
> >  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > 
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mach_traps.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mach_traps.h
> > @@ -9,11 +9,11 @@
> >  
> >  #define NMI_REASON_PORT		0x61
> >  
> > -#define NMI_REASON_MEMPAR	0x80
> > +#define NMI_REASON_SERR		0x80
> >  #define NMI_REASON_IOCHK	0x40
> > -#define NMI_REASON_MASK		(NMI_REASON_MEMPAR | NMI_REASON_IOCHK)
> > +#define NMI_REASON_MASK		(NMI_REASON_SERR | NMI_REASON_IOCHK)
> >  
> > -#define NMI_REASON_CLEAR_MEMPAR	0x04
> > +#define NMI_REASON_CLEAR_SERR	0x04
> 
> I already commented on this, patch #1 and #3 are basically the same in
> most parts which should be merged. What remains then in this patch is
> the modified printk() and the comment. Both could be added to #1 too
> which is then some sort of code cleanup patch.

Don thinks it is Ok to keep 2 patches.

> >  #define NMI_REASON_CLEAR_IOCHK	0x08
> >  #define NMI_REASON_CLEAR_MASK	0x0f
> >  
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> > @@ -301,15 +301,14 @@ gp_in_kernel:
> >  }
> >  
> >  static notrace __kprobes void
> > -mem_parity_error(unsigned char reason, struct pt_regs *regs)
> > +pci_serr_error(unsigned char reason, struct pt_regs *regs)
> >  {
> > -	printk(KERN_EMERG
> > -		"Uhhuh. NMI received for unknown reason %02x on CPU %d.\n",
> > -			reason, smp_processor_id());
> > -
> > -	printk(KERN_EMERG
> > -		"You have some hardware problem, likely on the PCI bus.\n");
> > +	printk(KERN_EMERG "NMI: PCI system error (SERR).\n");
> 
> You should keep reporting the cpu id to identify the affected node and
> also the reason.

Ok. I will add CPU ID in message. Because we know the reason, I don't
think we need the reason in message.

Best Regards,
Huang Ying


--
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/