linux-kernel - Re: x86, mce, Use user return notifier in mce

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:39:54 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
CC:	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
	Chen Gong <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: x86, mce, Use user return notifier in mce

On 01/13/2012 09:41 AM, Tony Luck wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
> > You are right.  User return notifier can not be used for SRAR.  I think
> > that may be useful for SRAO.  Where we need a way to do notify earlier
> > in case of the corresponding work_queue item is not executed in time.
>
> OK - I've been so focused on SRAR that I didn't think of the SRAO case.
> But even there it seems odd to use user return notifier. We'd like the
> SRAO work item to be executed promptly - but we don't care where it
> is executed. So the "execute on this cpu" part of user return notifiers
> doesn't quite fit.
>

Also, nothing bounds the time until a urn executes.  If the cpu stays in
the kernel forever, it will never fire.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/