linux-kernel - Re: [Patch V0] x86, mce: Don't clear global error reporting banks during cpu

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: <20150905153212.GB30336@nazgul.tnic>
Date:	Sat, 5 Sep 2015 17:32:12 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Boris Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Serge Ayoun <serge.ayoun@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch V0] x86, mce: Don't clear global error reporting banks
 during cpu_offline

On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 01:59:31PM -0400, Raj, Ashok wrote:
> Hummm.. just tried to keep the style as other parts of mcheck_cpu_init()
> where we have _mcheck_cpu_init_vendor().

But there's nothing init-like to disabling error reporting and this
function is not being called by mcheck_cpu_init()...

> Its not a rule, but sometimes local static functions have "__"
> varient.

Yes, that's internal functions, roughly.

> Maybe it should have been the double "__"?

Not at all - there's no layering here or whatever. Simply calling it
vendor_disable_error_reporting() is perfectly fine IMO.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
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/