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

Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F31C5653E@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:23:47 +0000
From:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <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

	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?

We used to have separate entries for "HT thread notices ... data load" and "HT thread notices ... instruction load"
because the old SDM had a complex table calling out the bit settings for each type of recoverable machine check.

Latest SDM simplifies the table making it clear that for every SRAR (software recoverable action required) error
we'll have the same bits in MCG_STATUS (EIPV=0, RIPV=1) ... so we don't need to check for the MCACOD value.
See attached snapshot of the new table.

-Tony

Download attachment "SRAR.png" of type "image/png" (17121 bytes)