linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: add support SRAO reported via CMC check

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: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F779F1D15@ORSMSX110.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:13:07 +0000
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:     Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>
CC:     "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: add support SRAO reported via CMC check

> OK, I'll add check for OVER=0 in v2.

Thinking a bit more on this ... do you just need to remove the check
for S=1 from the existing "AO" entries?  Or do we need the CMCI
match entry early in the table?

-Tony