linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] x86, MCE: Flesh out when to panic comment

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F3281EFC9@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 27 May 2014 22:33:15 +0000
From:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...capital.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86, MCE: Flesh out when to panic comment

> And this tolerant check looks fishy to me:
>
>                if (s->sev >= MCE_UC_SEVERITY && ctx == IN_KERNEL) {
>                        if (panic_on_oops || tolerant < 1)
>                                return MCE_PANIC_SEVERITY;
>                }
>
> since we set it to 1 by default. But I'll look again on a clear head
> tomorrow - it is too late here.

tolerant level 0 exists - but is somewhat crazy in the opposite direction
from the large values.  Look at the comment in mce.c ... level 0
means always panic if you see a UC error

-Tony