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: <20160809050109.GA18922@nazgul.tnic>
Date:	Tue, 9 Aug 2016 07:01:09 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	york sun <york.sun@....com>
Cc:	"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	"morbidrsa@...il.com" <morbidrsa@...il.com>,
	"oss@...error.net" <oss@...error.net>,
	Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>,
	Doug Thompson <dougthompson@...ssion.com>,
	"mchehab@...nel.org" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 03/11] driver/edac/mpc85xx_edac: Drop setting/clearing
 RFXE bit in HID1

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 04:31:19AM +0000, york sun wrote:
> Yes, for most SoCs RFXE remains cleared. Uncorrectable errors are 
> handled by EDAC.

And how is mpc85_xxx EDAC handling them?

mpc85xx_mc_check() only reports them.

And now to get to my original question: is it *enough* to report
uncorrectable errors on those platforms or do they need more
sophisticated error handling in order to disable data corruption?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ