linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2 6/7] x86, NMI, Add support to notify hardware error with unknown NMI

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: <20100928152733.GE13563@erda.amd.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:27:33 +0200
From:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
To:	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
CC:	huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>,
	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 6/7] x86, NMI, Add support to notify hardware error
 with unknown NMI

On 27.09.10 21:19:21, Huang Ying wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 21:38 +0800, Robert Richter wrote:
> > On 27.09.10 08:47:53, huang ying wrote:
> > 
> > > >>  arch/x86/kernel/hwerr.c    |   55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >
> > > > Instead of creating this file the code should be implemented in
> > > >
> > > >  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
> > > >
> > > > Similar AMD NB code is implemented in amd.c and k8.c.
> > > 
> > > Why? This file is not vendor specific.
> > 
> > No, it only implements an Intel specific PCI device, nothing else.
> 
> You can add AMD specific PCI device here too. We will add more device ID
> in the future.

I think it is not worth to introduce this file. There is no generic
code in and we have over places for vendor specific code.

> No. We do NOT catch unknown NMIs for a certain hardware here. We put the
> code here because we think it is general instead of hardware specific.
> 
> It should be a general rule to treat unknown NMI as hardware error. But
> to avoid to confuse some users have broken hardware (which will generate
> unknown NMI not for hardware error), we use a white list (machines with
> HEST or workable chipset via PCI ID).

Ok, a white list makes sense. This was not obvious in your
implementation.

-Robert

-- 
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center

--
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/