linux-kernel - Re: [NAK] Re: [PATCH -v2 9/9] ACPI, APEI, Generic Hardware Error Source POLL/IRQ/NMI notification type support

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: <20101025202344.GC13652@liondog.tnic>
Date:	Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:23:44 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@...glemail.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [NAK] Re: [PATCH -v2 9/9] ACPI, APEI, Generic Hardware Error
 Source POLL/IRQ/NMI notification type support

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:14:52AM -0700, Tony Luck wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> 
> > drivers/acpi/apei/ overlaps and duplicates drivers/edac/. We dont want two
> > facilities, two ABIs, two sets of behavior. erst-dbg even defines a /dev node with
> > two ioctls, and a debugfs file to read/write records ...
> 
> As mentioned above these 4-letter names from from the ACPI specification. ERST
> is perhaps the dumbest name of them all - "Error Record Serialization Table" is
> ACPI-speak for platform level non-volatile memory.  This code simply provides
> a mechanism for Linux to stash some information in nvram before the system is
> reset, and to retrieve it after the reboot.
> 
> The naming could be better - but I don't see any overlap with EDAC here.

You may be right but what we actually want is a consistent RAS
infrastructure. Didn't you point out at the last edac meeting in Boston
that concerning RAS Linux were in the stone ages? (at least this is what
I remember reading).

What we should do is put all that post-system-reset error info, ECC
errors mapping to DRAM devices, L3 cache index manipulation based on
excessive errors - you name it - together and stick it in ras/ or
drivers/ras or whatever. And all with a nice and easy to use userspace
tool on top.

Now it looks like a wart on arch/x86/ which truly doesn't belong there.
And I don't buy all that crap that it can't be done right.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.
--
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/