[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dffb19ab-daa2-a513-531e-c43279d8a4bf@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 13:24:42 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Ralf Ramsauer <ralf.ramsauer@...-regensburg.de>,
"Gupta, Pawan Kumar" <pawan.kumar.gupta@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [FYI PATCH 0/7] Mitigation for CVE-2018-12207
On 11/13/19 12:23 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 13/11/19 07:38, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> When reading MCE, error code 0150h, ie. SRAR, I was wondering if that
>> couldn't simply be handled by the host. But I suppose the symptom of
>> that erratum is not "just" regular recoverable MCE, rather
>> sometimes/always an unrecoverable CPU state, despite the error code, right?
> The erratum documentation talks explicitly about hanging the system, but
> it's not clear if it's just a result of the OS mishandling the MCE, or
> something worse. So I don't know. :( Pawan, do you?
It's "something worse".
I built a kernel module reproducer for this a long time ago. The
symptom I observed was the whole system hanging hard, requiring me to go
hit the power button. The MCE software machinery was not involved at
all from what I could tell.
About creating a unit test, I'd be personally happy to share my
reproducer, but I built it before this issue was root-caused. There are
actually quite a few underlying variants and a good unit test would make
sure to exercise all of them. My reproducer probably only exercised a
single case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists