linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] EDAC, ghes: use CPER module handles to locate DIMMs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <150ad0e4-e84a-565b-95ac-e7135e98bdc0@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Aug 2018 17:34:30 +0100
From:   James Morse <james.morse@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Fan Wu <wufan@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     mchehab@...nel.org, baicar.tyler@...il.com,
        linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        "Kani, Toshi" <toshi.kani@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC, ghes: use CPER module handles to locate DIMMs

Hi Boris,

On 30/08/18 11:43, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 06:33:52PM +0000, Fan Wu wrote:
>> The current ghes_edac driver does not update per-dimm error
>> counters when reporting memory errors, because there is no
>> platform-independent way to find DIMMs based on the error
>> information provided by firmware. This patch offers a solution
>> for platforms whose firmwares provide valid module handles
>> (SMBIOS type 17) in error records. In this case ghes_edac will
>> use the module handles to locate DIMMs and thus makes per-dimm
>> error reporting possible.

> If we're going to do this, it needs to be tested on an x86 box which loads
> ghes_edac. Adding Toshi to Cc.

Good point, thanks.


> Otherwise it must remain ARM-specific.

Hmmm, that would be a shame.

This should only be a problem if HPE Servers set CPER_MEM_VALID_MODULE_HANDLE,
but don't actually provide module handles, or if firmware has a different idea
of what they are.

If firmware never sets CPER_MEM_VALID_MODULE_HANDLE, this patch shouldn't change
anything.

(Someone must have an x86 that sets CPER_MEM_VALID_MODULE_HANDLE, otherwise the
code wouldn't be there right?!)


Thanks,

James