linux-kernel - RE: [Xen-devel] [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: <4FF2B87C020000780008D3E0@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date:	Tue, 03 Jul 2012 08:16:44 +0100
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To:	"Christoph Egger" <Christoph.Egger@....com>,
	"Jinsong Liu" <jinsong.liu@...el.com>
Cc:	"IanCampbell" <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
	"Ashok Raj" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
	"Donald D Dugger" <donald.d.dugger@...el.com>,
	"Haitao Shan" <haitao.shan@...el.com>,
	"Jun Nakajima" <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
	"Susie Li" <susie.li@...el.com>, "Tony Luck" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"Will Auld" <will.auld@...el.com>,
	"Xiantao Zhang" <xiantao.zhang@...el.com>,
	"Yunhong Jiang" <yunhong.jiang@...el.com>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"KeirFraser" <keir@....org>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [xen vMCE RFC V0.2] xen vMCE design

>>> On 02.07.12 at 19:32, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@...el.com> wrote:
> Thanks AMD's feedback :)
> 
> This vMCE design foils is basically for Intel MCA, involving many details 
> specific to Intel.
> I agree that for x86 Intel and AMD can share logic in many fields. However, 
> for MCA logic Intel and AMD are quite different, like
> 1. MSRs interface, e.g. MCG_CAP, MCi_MICS, MCi_CTL2, etc;
> 2. error injection, AMD provide NMI/single MCE/broadcast MCE, while in our 
> design only concern broadcast MCE# (and pretend to expose CMCI);
> 3. MCE handler: currently in xen Intel and AMD mce use different triggle 
> method and mce handler;
> 
> Considering the big difference, I suggest we separately provide Intel vMCE 
> and AMD vMCE (i.e. vmce_intel.c and vmce_amd.c).

I'm not convinced of the need, and would prefer aiming at a
shared implementation unless issues arise that make this
impossible.

Jan

--
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/