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: <4E036A2D.1060402@zytor.com>
Date:	Thu, 23 Jun 2011 09:30:37 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Stefan Assmann <sassmann@...nic.de>
CC:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>, 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 06/23/2011 08:37 AM, Stefan Assmann wrote:
> 
> According to Rick's reply in this thread a damaged row in a DIMM can
> easily cause a few thousand entries in the e820 table because it doesn't
> handle patterns. So the question I'm asking is, is it acceptable to
> have an e820 table with thousands maybe ten-thousands of entries?
> I really have no idea of the implications, maybe somebody else can
> comment on that.
> 

Given that that is what actually ends up happening in the kernel at some
point anyway, I don't see why it would matter.

The bubble sort has to go, but quite frankly stress-testing the range
handling isn't a bad thing.
	
	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/