linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] x86: mce: kexec: switch MCE handler for kexec/kdump

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: <20150306054454.GA19994@hori1.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
Date:	Fri, 6 Mar 2015 05:44:55 +0000
From:	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
To:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
CC:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	"Vivek Goyal" <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>,
	Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] x86: mce: kexec: switch MCE handler for kexec/kdump

On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 01:24:47AM +0000, Horiguchi Naoya(堀口 直也) wrote:
...
> > Is the "UC" entry at the end of the severities[] table just a catch-all for things that made it
> > past all the other entries? Does it ever really get used?
> 
> I read through the severity check table and it seems that all UC=1 case
> are already considered by the above entries, so it seems not used.

I was completely wrong, the "Uncorrected" entry is chosen when mca_cfg.ser is
false (where all checks with SER_REQUIRED are skipped) and UC=1 and OVER=0.