linux-kernel - Re: Uhhuh. NMI received for unknown reason 2c on CPU 0.

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]

Date:	Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:27:42 -0700
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: Uhhuh. NMI received for unknown reason 2c on CPU 0.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 02:32:56PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> Konstantin has some fixes for an e1000e power management issue related
>> to suspend/resume that he observed on an x220. He didn't see an NMI,
>> and apparently his problem has been around for a long time,
>
> Yeah, this is one of those issues you don't see *every* s/r cycle and
> besides, I just got this box and haven't run 3.{6,7} on it yet (maybe
> never will :-)).
>
>> so no idea whether it could be related. I just noticed the conjunction
>> of thinkpad/e1000e/resume/power saving in both reports.
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/18/147
>
> Yes, thanks Bjorn, that was a good suggestion. Btw, from reading the
> thread, those patches still need cooking a bit more, AFAICR people's
> objections/comments. Or should I go ahead and test them?

You're right, I don't think we're quite ready to merge those patches.
But if your NMI is easy to reproduce, it might be worth removing
e1000e altogether to see if it still happens.  I noticed in your
original log that the NMI occurred 5 seconds after the e1000e message,
and I could imagine some CPU or PCI response timeout being 5 seconds.

> It's just that I'm overly cautious every time I hear e1000e is involved:
>
> www.linux-magazine.com/content/download/62169/484085/file/Security_Lessons_Ftrace.pdf

Thanks for the pointer, that was an interesting read :)

Bjorn
--
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/