linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Update MCE severity condition check

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130626190845.GK20274@pd.tnic>
Date:	Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:08:45 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Chen Gong <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Update MCE severity condition check

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 05:16:12AM -0400, Luck, Tony wrote:
> From: Chen Gong <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> Update some SRAR severity conditions check to make it clearer
> according to latest Intel SDM Vol 3B (June 2013), table 15-20.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chen Gong <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
> ---
> 
> Chen Gong wrote:
> > If this patch is OK, would you please help to update it when merging
> > it? Thanks very much
> 
> This is what I plan to apply.
> 1. Changed "user land" to "in a user process" (2 places) per Boris comment
> 2. Changed "non-affected" to "unaffected" per Naveen comment
> 
> Anyone wants to jump on the "Acked-by" bandwagon - speak now.
> 
> -Tony
> 
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce-severity.c | 15 +++++----------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce-severity.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce-severity.c
> index beb1f16..e2703520 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce-severity.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce-severity.c
> @@ -110,22 +110,17 @@ static struct severity {
>  	/* known AR MCACODs: */
>  #ifdef	CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE
>  	MCESEV(
> -		KEEP, "HT thread notices Action required: data load error",
> -		SER, MASK(MCI_STATUS_OVER|MCI_UC_SAR|MCI_ADDR|MCACOD, MCI_UC_SAR|MCI_ADDR|MCACOD_DATA),
> -		MCGMASK(MCG_STATUS_EIPV, 0)
> +		KEEP, "Action required but unaffected thread is continuable",
> +		SER, MASK(MCI_STATUS_OVER|MCI_UC_SAR|MCI_ADDR|MCACOD, MCI_UC_SAR|MCI_ADDR),

Why did we lose MCACOD_DATA from the MASK above? Was this intentional?

> +		MCGMASK(MCG_STATUS_RIPV, MCG_STATUS_RIPV)

This change I can understand as restart IP is valid for thread is
continuable.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/