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]
Date:   Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:59:37 +0000
From:   "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
To:     "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "x86/mce/AMD: Collect error info even if valid
 bits are not set"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-edac-owner@...r.kernel.org <linux-edac-
> owner@...r.kernel.org> On Behalf Of Ghannam, Yazen
> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 10:02 AM
> To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
> Cc: linux-edac@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> tony.luck@...el.com; x86@...nel.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "x86/mce/AMD: Collect error info even if
> valid bits are not set"
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
> > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 4:08 PM
> > To: Ghannam, Yazen <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
> > Cc: linux-edac@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> > tony.luck@...el.com; x86@...nel.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "x86/mce/AMD: Collect error info even if
> > valid bits are not set"
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 07:58:51PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> > > So at a minimum, we should always save and report as much as we can.
> >
> > Only on Zen or all AMD families?
> >
> 
> I'll confirm with the HW folks. I understand it as a change in philosophy
> rather than a change in hardware.
> 

So this recommendation could apply to all families, but it's okay if we just
apply this behavior to SMCA systems. That way we don't need to worry
about changing things on legacy systems.

I'll write a new patch that abstracts the register reads and applies the
different behaviors.

In any case, this patch should be reverted since faking the valid bits will
cause the downstream code in the notifier blocks to process errors they
shouldn't.

Thanks,
Yazen

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ