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  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]
Date:	Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:12:55 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <>
To:	Tony Luck <>
Cc:	Hidetoshi Seto <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>, Borislav Petkov <>,,
	"Huang\, Ying" <>, Avi Kivity <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] MCE: Mask out address mask bits below address granuality

Tony Luck <> writes:

> 2011/6/10 Hidetoshi Seto <>:
>> Why do you have to mask it out in kernel, why not in user/logger?
>> One possible story is:
>>  "... the brand-new Xeon XXXX has new MCx_***_VALID bit in ****
>>  register, if it is set the lower bits of MCx_ADDR indicates
>>  ****, otherwise the bits are undefined ..."
>> So I think that kernel should convey the raw value from hardware to
>> userland.  Even if it contains some noise on it, user can determine
>> whether it is useful or not.  And more, since this is an error record,
>> there will be no second chance to retrieve the data afterward.
> This is a good point - we should log the original untouched bits someplace.

These bits are undefined. It doesn't make sense to log undefined bits.
They can contain random values. Showing random values just confuses

How would the user even know it's undefined?  They normally don't read
the specs. Really programs have to handle that for the user. And there
the only sane way is to just mask them off.

-- -- Speaking for myself only
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists