[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170926222054.sshmh4t2tson3hyd@pd.tnic>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:20:54 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
Cc: "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/MCE/AMD: Always give PANIC severity for UC errors in
kernel context
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 03:21:22PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> How should I CC:stable?
Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> There are the stable branches on kernel.org and some distro kernels based on
> older kernel versions.
>
> The AMD severity grading function was introduced in v4.1 and has this issue.
> However, the following commit was included in v4.6 and masks the issue.
>
> b2f9d678e28c x86/mce: Check for faults tagged in EXTABLE_CLASS_FAULT exception table entries
>
> This patch will apply to v4.9 and later. Another version will be needed to apply
> to the v4.1 and v4.4. stable branches.
Then write that in the commit message. But *also* add the main reason
why you're doing this - to explicitly state that IN_KERNEL context is
panicked on on AMD. Because if it weren't for it, old kernels should
simply backport b2f9d678e28c and be done with it.
And I still don't understand the IN_KERNEL_RECOV thing you mention in
the commit message. That's Intel-only, what does it have to do with AMD?
Btw, while at it, fix that signature
static int mce_severity_amd_smca(struct mce *m, int err_ctx)
to
static int mce_severity_amd_smca(struct mce *m, enum context err_ctx)
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists