linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86, MCE, AMD: detect the threshold at the initialization period

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: <20140930115229.GE4639@pd.tnic>
Date:	Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:52:29 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>
Cc:	tony.luck@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, MCE, AMD: detect the threshold at the
 initialization period

On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 11:38:09AM +0800, Chen Yucong wrote:
> ADM64 APM Volume 2 (9.3.2 Error-Reporting Register Banks)documents
> that the size of threshold counter is implementation-dependent, and
> the implementations with less than 16 bits fill the most significant
> unimplemented bits with zeros. So THRESHOLD_MAX should be detected
> at the initialization period rather than a constant.
> 
> On the other hand, Error Counter (ERRCT) is bits 47:32, and accordingly
> MASK_ERR_COUNT_HI should be 0x0000FFFF instead of 0x00000FFF.

All the families currently use 12 bits only, i.e. slice [43:32] so
there's no need for changing the current code. We'll address it when it
is actually needed.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/