linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 6/8] EDAC, mce_amd: Convert to seq

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: <20170728085959.126297dc@vmware.local.home>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:59:59 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     linux-edac <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Yazen Ghannam <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/8] EDAC, mce_amd: Convert to seq_buf

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 12:51:40 +0200
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 09:09:33AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 09:47:08PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:  
> > > What happens if two CPUs have mce's at the same time? Wouldn't one
> > > corrupt the other buffer. 128 isn't too big to put on the stack is it?  
> > 
> > Yeah, putting it on the stack is probably safer, just in case.
> > 
> > What is even better, though, is if I extended
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce-genpool.c to allocate a second buffer for the
> > decoded strings. We use it for the struct mces right now.  
> 
> Here's a conversion to a 2-page backed genpool. Seems to work:

Interesting, this is the first I heard of the genpool. I probably could
have used this in other code. Good to know (learn something new every
day :-)

I'll have to take a look at it when I get home later today (still
bouncing between airports).

-- Steve