linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: Clear a useless global variable in mce.c

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: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F3280EA8A@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 19 May 2014 22:06:38 +0000
From:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:	Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: Clear a useless global variable in mce.c

> I mean, does the machine even recover after some of the cores have gone
> into the weeds in #MC? Provided, of course, we don't have a no-way-out
> MCE and we can resume execution.

I doubt there is any hope for recovery if not all processors show up ... things
have to be already very broken for the machine check to be blocked.

> Or is the box so hammered that there's no turning back?

I think so.

> Concerning mce_entry, I don't care all that much - if it is really
> useful, you might slap a comment saying so and keep it, for all I care.

I'm OK with it going - but as I said before I'd like to see mce_callin printed
(so I can tell if just one cpu showed up, just the cpus from one socket, or
some other significant number).

-Tony