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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20101026072210.GE13036@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 26 Oct 2010 09:22:10 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@...glemail.com>,
	"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>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [NAK] Re: [PATCH -v2 9/9] ACPI, APEI, Generic Hardware Error
 Source POLL/IRQ/NMI notification type support


* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:

> >From Kconfig:
> 
>   EDAC is designed to report errors in the core system.
>   These are low-level errors that are reported in the CPU or
>   supporting chipset or other subsystems:
>   memory errors, cache errors, PCI errors, thermal throttling, etc..
>   If unsure, select 'Y'.
> 
> So please explain why your error reporting is so different from the above that it 
> justifies a separate facility. And you better come up with a real good explanation 
> other than we looked at EDAC and it did not fit our needs.

Btw., it's not just about EDAC - the firmware can store Linux events persistently 
(beyond allowing the firmware to insert its own RAS events), that is obviously 
_hugely_ useful for kernel debugging in general. We could inject debugging events 
there and recover them after a crash, etc.

As long as it's all integrated into the standard event logging facilities it could 
be very useful (and i dont generally complain about things that are insignificant).

As /dev/erst-dbg it's not useful at all - in fact it might close the door to sane 
future usage of this hw facility if some crappy user-space learns to rely on the 
/dev/erst-dbg ABI.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/