linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ghes_edac: add platform check to enable ghes

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: <1500654661.2042.49.camel@hpe.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:40:20 +0000
From:   "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>
To:     "mchehab@...pensource.com" <mchehab@...pensource.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mchehab@...nel.org" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        "rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        "srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com" 
        <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
        "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ghes_edac: add platform check to enable ghes_edac

On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 12:44 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Fri, 21 Jul 2017 15:34:50 +0000
> "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com> escreveu:
> 
> > On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 17:13 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 03:08:41PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu
> > > wrote:  
> > > > Yes, that is correct.  Corrected errors are reported to the OS
> > > > when they exceeded the platform's threshold.  
> > > 
> > > Are those thresholds user-configurable?  
> > 
> > I suppose it'd depend on vendors, but I do not think users can do
> > it properly unless they have depth knowledge about the hardware.
> > 
> > > If not, what are you telling users who want to see *every*
> > > corrected error for measuring DIMM wear and so on...?  
> > 
> > Corrected errors are normal and expected to occur on healthy
> > hardware.  They do not need user's attention until they repeatedly
> > occurred at a same place.
> 
> Yes, they're expected to happen. Still, some sys admins have their
> own measurements about what's "normal" for their scenario, and want
> to monitor every single corrected error, running their own
> algorithm to warn if the number of corrected errors is above their
> "normal" rate.

I suppose these admins had to do it because their platforms reported
all corrected errors.  It addresses such administrators' burden.

Thanks,
-Toshi