[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210323163258.GC4729@zn.tnic>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:32:58 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jarkko@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org,
dave.hansen@...el.com, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com,
haitao.huang@...el.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/25] x86/sgx: Wipe out EREMOVE from
sgx_free_epc_page()
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 04:21:47PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> I like the idea of pointing at the documentation. The documentation should
> probably emphasize that something is very, very wrong.
Yap, because no matter how we formulate the error message, it still ain't enough
and needs a longer explanation.
> E.g. if a kernel bug triggers EREMOVE failure and isn't detected until
> the kernel is widely deployed in a fleet, then the folks deploying the
> kernel probably _should_ be in all out panic. For this variety of bug
> to escape that far, it means there are huge holes in test coverage, in
> both the kernel itself and in the infrasturcture of whoever is rolling
> out their new kernel.
You sound just like someone who works at a company with a big fleet, oh
wait...
:-)
And yap, you big fleeted guys will more likely catch it but we do have
all these other customers who have a handful of servers only so they
probably won't be able to do such a wide coverage.
So I hope they'll appreciate this longer explanation about what to do
when they hit it. And normally I wouldn't even care but we almost never
tell people to reboot their boxes to fix sh*t - that's the other OS.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists