linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC, ghes: Make it a proper module

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:   Wed, 26 Jul 2017 19:24:59 +0000
From:   "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>
To:     "mchehab@...radead.org" <mchehab@...radead.org>,
        "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>
CC:     "rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC, ghes: Make it a proper module

On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 15:17 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Wed, 26 Jul 2017 17:27:12 +0000
 :
> I didn't try to inject an error, as I'm not sure if EINJ feature is
> enabled on this BIOS. Probably not.

I believe it has EINJ support.

> At least on this machine, I very much prefer to use sb_edac driver.
> 
> As I explained earlier in the previous thread, I just don't if the
> BIOS would be doing the right thing for CE, as I don't know its
> internal algorithm. 
> 
> Also, as I'm maintaining the EDAC userspace tools (rasdaemon),
> I would really love to get a few CE error reports there from time to
> time, as it could be used to check if rasdaemon is doing do the right
> thing to them.
> 
> So, I very much prefer to not have any threshold at all there at
> BIOS.

Using sb_edac does not change the fact that it is FF.  I do not think
you'd see normal CEs on your box.

Thanks,
-Toshi