linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Machine check recovery when kernel accesses poison

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]

Date:	Wed, 11 Nov 2015 23:28:47 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
	x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Machine check recovery when kernel accesses
 poison

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 01:48:04PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> No flag. We can search MCi_ADDR across the ranges to see whether this
> was a normal RAM error on non-volatile. But that doesn't make this patch
> moot. We still need to change the return address to go to the fixup code
> instead of back to the place where we hit the error.

Why?

If you know that it is in the nvdimm range, you can grade the error with
lower severity...

Or do you mean that without the exception table we'll return back to the
insn causing the error and loop indefinitely this way?

-- 
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/