linux-kernel - Re: Fwd: [PATCH] x86, MCE, AMD: save IA32_MCi_STATUS before machine_check

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: <54528BB1.7080401@amd.com>
Date:	Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:04:17 -0500
From:	Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@....com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:	Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH] x86, MCE, AMD: save IA32_MCi_STATUS before machine_check_poll()
 resets it

On 10/29/2014 10:59 AM, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
> On 10/22/2014 4:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> Hi Aravind,
>>
>> question: what's the story with MC?_MISC[IntP], is that bit still there?
>> Because I don't see it in my BKDGs here.
>
> Yep, It exists.
> Maybe you are referring to Fam15h M0h BKDG? I think the bit was 
> introduced only from F15h M30h onwards.
> The bit does *not* exist for bank=4, But-
> if (bank ==4)
>   return true;
>
> takes care of that.
>
>> The background of the story is
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/7/84
>>
>> There's this thing we did at the time
>>
>> f227d4306cf3 ("x86, MCE, AMD: Make APIC LVT thresholding interrupt 
>> optional")
>>
>> which, AFAICR, is about some F15h versions having a counter but *not*
>> generating a thresholding interrupt. Can you confirm that is still
>> the case and we can have a counter but no interrupt gets generated on
>> overflow?
>>
>
> So yes, moving the assignment inside the if condition should work just 
> fine.
>
> I see the patch on your 'ras-for-3.19' branch does not have this, so 
> I'll make this modification
> to the branch before I test it.
>

Hi Boris,
I have tested the branch with this bit:

  if (b.interrupt_capable) {
             ... ...
             if (mce_threshold_vector != amd_threshold_interrupt)
                     mce_threshold_vector = amd_threshold_interrupt;
     }

and it works fine.

Thanks,
-Aravind.


--
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/