linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] support for broken memory modules (BadRAM)

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: <4E0251AB.8090702@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 22 Jun 2011 13:33:47 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Stefan Assmann <sassmann@...nic.de>
CC:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tony.luck@...el.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, mingo@...e.hu, rick@...rein.org,
	rdunlap@...otime.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] support for broken memory modules (BadRAM)

On 06/22/2011 01:30 PM, Stefan Assmann wrote:
> On 22.06.2011 20:15, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 06/22/2011 04:18 AM, Stefan Assmann wrote:
>>>
>>> The idea is to allow the user to specify RAM addresses that shouldn't be
>>> touched by the OS, because they are broken in some way. Not all machines have
>>> hardware support for hwpoison, ECC RAM, etc, so here's a solution that allows to
>>> use bitmasks to mask address patterns with the new "badram" kernel command line
>>> parameter.
>>> Memtest86 has an option to generate these patterns since v2.3 so the only thing
>>> for the user to do should be:
>>> - run Memtest86
>>> - note down the pattern
>>> - add badram=<pattern> to the kernel command line
>>>
>>
>> We already support the equivalent functionality with
>> memmap=<address>$<length> for those with only a few ranges... this has
>> been supported for ages, literally.  For those with a lot of ranges,
>> like Google, the command line is insufficient.
> 
> Right, I think this has been discussed a while ago. So the advantages I
> see in this approach are. It allows to break down memory exclusion to
> the page level with a pattern of non-consecutive pages. So if every
> other page would be considered bad that's a bit tough to deal with using
> memmap.
> Secondly patterns can be easily generated by running Memtest86 and thus
> easily be fed to the kernel by command line. Making it much more feasible
> for the average user to take advantage of it.
> 

How common are nontrivial patterns on real hardware?  This would be
interesting to hear from Google or another large user.

If so, we should probably introduce this as another linked-list data
structure; we can allow it to be preprocessed from the command line if
need be.

I have to say I think Google's point that truncating the list is
unacceptable... that would mean running in a known-bad configuration,
and even a hard crash would be better.

	-hpa
--
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/