linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] HWPOISON: clean up memory_failure() vs. __memory

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: <20111215064444.GA14237@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:44:44 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] HWPOISON: clean up memory_failure() vs.
 __memory_failure()


* Luck, Tony <tony.luck@...el.com> wrote:

> > > >  	printk(KERN_ERR "Action optional memory failure at %lx ignored\n", pfn);
> > > 
> > > Btw., while at it, could we phrase this message in a more 
> > > obvious way to users, such as 'Non-fatal memory failure at 
> > > %lx ignored'?
> > 
> > Yeah, that's might not be as correct as we want it to be. AO 
> > means it is an uncorrectable error, i.e. it will become fatal 
> > if we'd consumed it, but it isn't that now because we just saw 
> > it passing by in the cacheline...
> > 
> > Maybe "Fatal, unconsumed error ignored..."
> 
> The overall meaning is "land mine seen but not stepped on yet"

Perfect message!

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/