linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/MCE/AMD: Always give PANIC severity for UC errors in kernel context

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: <20170926120115.z7rorwli3idaxxyr@pd.tnic>
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:01:15 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Yazen Ghannam <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
Cc:     linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/MCE/AMD: Always give PANIC severity for UC errors in
 kernel context

(drop CC:stable from CC list)

Do not add CC:stable when sending the patch with git send-email.

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 09:07:11AM -0500, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> From: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
> 
> Our current AMD severity logic can possibly give MCE_AR_SEVERITY for
> uncorrectable errors in kernel context. The current #MC handler only calls
> memory_failure() on errors in user context, but older versions will call
> memory_failure() unconditionally.

Err, I don't understand this aspect: what does "older versions" mean
here exactly?

There are no older versions of the #MC handler - there's only one
version - the version against which this patch gets applied.

Hmmm?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.