[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPcxDJ6xx00Gjn6DxoMpdJ7UjNeJUp2613jqGRm7ZZeuMNeSjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:47:21 -0700
From: Jue Wang <juew@...gle.com>
To: bp@...en8.de
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, luto@...nel.org,
naoya.horiguchi@....com, tony.luck@...el.com, x86@...nel.org,
yaoaili@...gsoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mce/copyin: fix to not SIGBUS when copying from user
hits poison
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:07:22 +0200, Petkov, Borislav wrote:
>> KVM apparently passes a machine check into the guest.
> Ah, there it is:
> static void kvm_send_hwpoison_signal(unsigned long address, struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
> send_sig_mceerr(BUS_MCEERR_AR, (void __user *)address, PAGE_SHIFT, tsk);
> }
This path is when EPT #PF finds accesses to a hwpoisoned page and
sends SIGBUS to user space (KVM exits into user space) with the same
semantic as if regular #PF found access to a hwpoisoned page.
The KVM_X86_SET_MCE ioctl actually injects a machine check into the guest.
We are in process to launch a product with MCE recovery capability in
a KVM based virtualization product and plan to expand the scope of the
application of it in the near future.
> So what I'm missing with all this fun is, yeah, sure, we have this
> facility out there but who's using it? Is anyone even using it at all?
The in-memory database and analytical domain are definitely using it.
A couple examples:
SAP HANA - as we've tested and planned to launch as a strategic
enterprise use case with MCE recovery capability in our product
SQL server - https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/2967651/inf-sql-server-may-display-memory-corruption-and-recovery-errors
Cheers,
-Jue
Powered by blists - more mailing lists