linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm,hwpoison: return -EBUSY when page already poisoned

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:   Wed, 31 Mar 2021 12:58:50 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Aili Yao <yaoaili@...gsoft.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        HORIGUCHI NAOYA( 堀口 直也) 
        <naoya.horiguchi@....com>
Cc:     "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "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>,
        "inux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <inux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "yangfeng1@...gsoft.com" <yangfeng1@...gsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,hwpoison: return -EBUSY when page already poisoned

On 31.03.21 12:56, Aili Yao wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:39:30 +0100
> Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:28:18AM +0000, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote:
>>> Hi Aili,
>>>
>>> I agree that this set_mce_nospec() is not expected to be called for
>>> "already hwpoisoned" page because in the reported case the error
>>> page is already contained and no need to resort changing cache mode.
>>
>> Out of curiosity, what is the current behavour now?
>> Say we have an ongoing MCE which has marked the page as HWPoison but
>> memory_failure did not take any action on the page yet.
>> And then, we have another MCE, which ends up there.
>> set_mce_nospec might clear _PAGE_PRESENT bit.
>>
>> Does that have any impact on the first MCE?
>>
>>> It seems to me that memory_failure() does not return MF_XXX.  But yes,
>>> returning some positive value for the reported case could be a solution.
>>
>> No, you are right. I somehow managed to confuse myself.
>> I see now that MF_XXX return codes are filtered out in page_action.
>>
>>> We could use some negative value (error code) to report the reported case,
>>> then as you mentioned above, some callers need change to handle the
>>> new case, and the same is true if you use some positive value.
>>> My preference is -EHWPOISON, but other options are fine if justified well.
>>
>> -EHWPOISON seems like a good fit.
>>
> 
> Hi Oscar, david:
> 
> Long away fron this topic, but i noticed today I made a stupid mistake that EHWPOISON is already
> been declared, so we should better return EHWPOISON for this case.
> 
> Really sorry for this!
> 
> As the patch is still under review, I will post a new version for this, if I change this, may I add
> your review tag here please?

Just resend as v2. We will review and post our RBs there.


-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb