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:	Fri, 18 Jul 2014 14:23:04 -0700
From:	Tony Luck <>
To:	Borislav Petkov <>
Cc:	Havard Skinnemoen <>,
	Linux Kernel <>,
	Ewout van Bekkum <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] x86-mce: Add spinlocks to prevent duplicated MCP and
 CMCI reports.

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Borislav Petkov <> wrote:
> Well, maybe it is about time we tracked shared banks.

For cpus that support CMCI and the MCi_CTL2 registers we do track
sharing. Only one cpu gets to be the "owner" of a bank that supports
CMCI (the first one to find it and set bit 30 in the CTL2 register).

The test_bit()  at the top of the loop in machine_check_poll() makes
sure only the owner of a bank actually looks at it.

        for (i = 0; i < mca_cfg.banks; i++) {
                if (!mce_banks[i].ctl || !test_bit(i, *b))

If we don't have CMCI, then we don't have the CTL2 registers, and
so have no way to find out which banks are shared.

> We can evaluate later if the IRQs disabling is too heavy after all.

I'd be surprised if it was a problem in practice. If we have  CMCI,
then we limit the banks that we look at (and if we see a high rate
of interrupts, then we turn off interrupts an poll).

If we don't have CMCI, then we are polling at a pretty low rate
(current code adjusts the rate higher if we are finding errors to
log, but we don't let that rate rise forever ... cap is ~ 1HZ).

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