linux-kernel - RE: [xen vMCE RFC V0.2] xen vMCE design

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: <DE8DF0795D48FD4CA783C40EC8292335263B9D@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:54:40 +0000
From:	"Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@...el.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>, "Auld, Will" <will.auld@...el.com>
CC:	"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
	"Dugger, Donald D" <donald.d.dugger@...el.com>,
	"Shan, Haitao" <haitao.shan@...el.com>,
	"Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
	"Li, Susie" <susie.li@...el.com>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@...el.com>,
	"Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@...el.com>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Keir Fraser <keir@....org>
Subject: RE: [xen vMCE RFC V0.2] xen vMCE design

Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 27.06.12 at 05:51, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@...el.com> wrote:
>> This is updated xen vMCE design foils, according to comments from
>> community recently. 
>> 
>> This foils focus on vMCE part of Xen MCA, so as Keir said, it's some
>> dense. Later Will will present a document to elaborate more,
>> including Intel MCA and surrounding features and Xen implementation.
> 
> For MCi_CTL2 you probably meant to say "allow setting CMCI_EN
> and error count threshold"?

Yes, exactly! the words is w/ subtle but important different meaning.

> 
> The 2-bank approach also needs to be brought in line with the
> current host derived value in MCG_CAP, especially if the code to
> implement this new model doesn't make it into 4.2 (which would
> generally save a larger value).
> 
> Jan

Let me repeat in my word to avoid misunderstanding about your concern:
Your concern rooted from the history patch (c/s 24887, as attached) which used to solve vMCE migration issue caused from bank number. I guess the patch was not in xen4.1.x but would be in xen 4.2 release recently (right? and when will xen 4.2 release?)
Per my understanding, you want us to make sure our new vMCE model compatible w/ olde vMCE. For example if our patch in xen 4.3 release, you want to make sure a guest migrate from xen 4.2 to 4.3 would not broken. Is this your concern?

Thanks,
Jinsong
Content of type "message/rfc822" skipped