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: <20170724130402.0f05c0ba@vento.lan>
Date:   Mon, 24 Jul 2017 13:04:13 -0300
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>,
        "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>,
        "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

Em Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:37:16 +0200
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> escreveu:

> > Customers do not see error counts.  I do not think it's bogus.

> > I am just trying to enable OS error reporting with ghes_edac.  
> 
> I know, you don't have to state the obvious constantly.

The problem I see is that, currently, on users that have EDAC
already enabled, the users gets the errors directly from the
hardware.

If the Kernel force those users to use ghes_edac by default,
they they won't see the error counts anymore, but, instead,
hardware reports that the memories need to be replaced.

Well, if such users are handling thresholds themselves, they
won't see those errors anymore, as the errors will be masked.

That's a regression.

So, the right solution would be to keep hardware first, but
providing a modprobe parameter to let them switch to software
first.

Thanks,
Mauro