linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 20/25] x86/mcheck: Be prepared for a rollback back to the ONLINE state

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: <20161107104054.7lcuca5sjxvgxhzk@linutronix.de>
Date:   Mon, 7 Nov 2016 11:40:55 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rt@...utronix.de,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/25] x86/mcheck: Be prepared for a rollback back to the
 ONLINE state

On 2016-11-07 11:32:19 [+0100], Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 03:50:16PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > If we try a CPU down and fail in the middle then we roll back to the
> > online state. This  means we would perform CPU_ONLINE()
> > without invoking CPU_DEAD() for the cleanup of what was allocated in
> 
> Are CPU_ONLINE() and CPU_DEAD() functions? Those are the states, right?

those are states. I meant here the driver specific function invoked in
those states.

> > index 55cd018bc1ae..3e529fd747f8 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_amd.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_amd.c
> > @@ -1097,6 +1097,9 @@ static int threshold_create_device(unsigned int cpu)
> >  	struct threshold_bank **bp;
> >  	int err = 0;
> >  
> > +	bp = per_cpu(threshold_banks, cpu);
> > +	if (bp)
> > +		return 0;
> 
> <--- newline here.

okay.

Sebastian