linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/mce/AMD: Carve out SMCA bank configuration

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:   Tue, 4 Apr 2017 15:45:33 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
Cc:     "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/mce/AMD: Carve out SMCA bank configuration

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 01:34:42PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> I'd like to keep the functions separate since they're logically independent. I can
> define something like smca_configure() as a wrapper function that can contain
> current and future SMCA related functions. Is this okay?

Are you planning to call the one and not the other in some path?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.