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  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:	Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:16:56 -0700
From:	Havard Skinnemoen <>
To:	"Chen, Gong" <>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <>, Tony Luck <>,
	Linux Kernel <>,
	Ewout van Bekkum <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] x86-mce: Modify CMCI poll interval to adjust for
 small check_interval values.

On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Chen, Gong <> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 02:24:31PM -0700, Havard Skinnemoen wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Borislav Petkov <> wrote:
>> > Why min 3 polls? How do you come up with exactly that frequency?
>> The idea is that if we make it equal to check_interval, it might
>> bounce back and forth a lot. So we need to divide by something, and 8
>> seems like a nice, safe value, and it seems to work well. We're not
>> opposed to considering other values, of course (e.g. 2 and 4 might
>> work well too, but with somewhat higher risk of ping-ponging).
> That value looks chosen a little bit at will. How about updating
> CMCI_POLL_INTERVAL when check_interval is changed to ensure
> CMCI_POLL_INTERVAL <= check_interval always.

I guess that would work equally well, but we still need to determine
the magic number of how much less we want CMCI_POLL_INTERVAL to be.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists