linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/mce/AMD: Redo use of SMCA MCA

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: <20170411132453.ryjo3ipexkjstpsv@pd.tnic>
Date:   Tue, 11 Apr 2017 15:24:53 +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 v2 1/2] x86/mce/AMD: Redo use of SMCA MCA_DE{STAT,ADDR}
 registers

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 01:18:50PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> So log_error() reads/clears MCA_STATUS, right? This won't affect MCA_DESTAT
> on SMCA systems. So if we call log_error_smca() and unconditionally read
> MCA_DESTAT, we will find the same deferred error that we logged in log_error().

I'm reading this as, "we log the same deferred error in *both* the
original MCA MSRs and in the new DE* ones". Correct?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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