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  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, 30 Aug 2017 19:02:06 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <>
To:     Sinan Kaya <>
Cc:     "Baicar, Tyler" <>,
        Tony Luck <>,,,,,,,,,,,
        Linux PCI <>,
        Huang Ying <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: apei: call into AER handling regardless of severity

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:31:06AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> I see. We should probably try to do something only if GHES_SEV_CORRECTED or
> If somebody wants to crash the system with GHES_SEV_PANIC, there is no point
> in doing additional work.

Makes sense.

Whatever we do, I'd like to have this all nicely documented *why* we're
doing the recovery policy we're doing.

> Sounds good. Do you still want to do PCIe recovery in the case of
> GHES_SEV_PANIC or if some FW returns GHES_SEV_NO?

So I read GHES_SEV_PANIC as: we should panic and stop any processing
whatsoever ASAP in order to avoid further error propagation. So doing
recovery there might *actually* be a bad idea.

GHES_SEV_NO would map to AER_CORRECTABLE and I think that would mean,
print the error to let the user know but no need to recover because no
harm was done.

I *think*.


SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend├Ârffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N├╝rnberg)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists