linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI / APEI: restore interrupt before panic in sdei flow

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:   Mon, 11 Oct 2021 18:23:35 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Liguang Zhang <zhangliguang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / APEI: restore interrupt before panic in sdei flow

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 11:10:28PM +0800, Liguang Zhang wrote:
> We use ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_SOFTWARE_DELEGATED Notify type for ras event.
> 
> In ATF:
> ehf_activate_priority()
>    dispatch sdei()
> ehf_deactivate_priority()
> 
> If ras error severity is fatal, panic was called in sdei(),
> ehf_deactivate_priority was not called. we should restore interrupt before panic
> otherwise kdump will trigger error.

I have *absolutely* no clue what this commit message is trying to tell
me - sorry you'd have to try again. Maybe structuring it this way, would
help:

--
Problem is A.

It happens because of B.

Fix it by doing C.

(Potentially do D).

For more detailed info, see
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst, Section "2) Describe your
changes".

Also, to the tone, from Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:

 "Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz"
  instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy
  to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change
  its behaviour."

Also, do not talk about what your patch does - that should hopefully be
visible in the diff itself. Rather, talk about *why* you're doing what
you're doing.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette