linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/mcheck/AMD: Reduce number of blocks scanned per bank

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:	Thu, 14 Jan 2016 23:53:59 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@....com>
Cc:	tony.luck@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
	hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/mcheck/AMD: Reduce number of blocks scanned per
 bank

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 04:48:22PM -0600, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
> True. But that BlkPtr logic also will undergo changes as it's interpretation
> for future processors is different.

But there still must be a bit there which says "this register is valid",
like MCi_MISC[63].

And so I'd very much prefer checking a bit (or bits) instead of relying
on defines.

> We are guaranteed to have all the MISC registers (all 5 of them) going
> forward.

Guarantees are worth nothing.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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