linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: drop cpu_missing since we have more capable mce_missing

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]

Message-ID: <84e2622e4300490587793d2509f7b3ff@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Nov 2021 19:50:57 +0000
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     Zhaolong Zhang <zhangzl2013@....com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: drop cpu_missing since we have more capable
 mce_missing_cpus

>> Just a note that skipping the mce_panic() here isn't going to help
>> much. With some CPUs stuck not responding to #MC the system is going
>> to lock up or crash for other timeouts in the next few seconds.
>
> Yeh, I spent a couple of minutes today staring at this ->tolerant
> thing and wondering why we need it at all. I wouldn't mind ripping it
> altogether unless you're using it for testing or so.

I think it might have been useful before recoverable machine checks. But
now it just seems to cause confusion. I do not ever use it. I would not be
sad to see it go.

-Tony