linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] x86/mce: retrieve poison range from hardware

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8e817134-bfa9-72bc-3601-eeb1a138fe37@oracle.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Jul 2022 19:34:55 +0000
From:   Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.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>,
        "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev" <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] x86/mce: retrieve poison range from hardware

On 7/27/2022 12:30 PM, Jane Chu wrote:
> On 7/27/2022 12:24 PM, Jane Chu wrote:
>> On 7/27/2022 11:56 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
>>> Jane Chu wrote:
>>>> With Commit 7917f9cdb503 ("acpi/nfit: rely on mce->misc to determine
>>>> poison granularity") that changed nfit_handle_mce() callback to report
>>>> badrange according to 1ULL << MCI_MISC_ADDR_LSB(mce->misc), it's been
>>>> discovered that the mce->misc LSB field is 0x1000 bytes, hence 
>>>> injecting
>>>> 2 back-to-back poisons and the driver ends up logging 8 badblocks,
>>>> because 0x1000 bytes is 8 512-byte.
>>>>
>>>> Dan Williams noticed that apei_mce_report_mem_error() hardcode
>>>> the LSB field to PAGE_SHIFT instead of consulting the input
>>>> struct cper_sec_mem_err record.  So change to rely on hardware whenever
>>>> support is available.
>>>>
>>>> Link: 
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/7ed50fd8-521e-cade-77b1-738b8bfb8502@oracle.com 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
>>>>   1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c 
>>>> b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c
>>>> index 717192915f28..26d63818b2de 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/apei.c
>>>> @@ -29,15 +29,27 @@
>>>>   void apei_mce_report_mem_error(int severity, struct 
>>>> cper_sec_mem_err *mem_err)
>>>>   {
>>>>       struct mce m;
>>>> +    int grain = PAGE_SHIFT;
>>>>       if (!(mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_PA))
>>>>           return;
>>>> +    /*
>>>> +     * Even if the ->validation_bits are set for address mask,
>>>> +     * to be extra safe, check and reject an error radius '0',
>>>> +     * and fallback to the default page size.
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    if (mem_err->validation_bits & CPER_MEM_VALID_PA_MASK) {
>>>> +        grain = ~mem_err->physical_addr_mask + 1;
>>>> +        if (grain == 1)
>>>> +            grain = PAGE_SHIFT;
>>>
>>> Wait, if @grain is the number of bits to mask off the address, shouldn't
>>> this be something like:
>>>
>>>      grain = min_not_zero(PAGE_SHIFT, 
>>> hweight64(~mem_err->physical_addr_mask));
>>
>> I see. I guess what you meant is
>>     grain = min(PAGE_SHIFT, (1 + 
>> hweight64(~mem_err->physical_addr_mask)));
> 
> Sorry, take that back, it won't work either.

This will work,
   grain = min_not_zero(PAGE_SHIFT - 1, 
hweight64(~mem_err->physical_addr_mask));
   grain++;
but too sophisticated?  I guess I prefer the simple "if" expression.

thanks,
-jane

> 
> -jane
> 
>> so that in the pmem poison case, 'grain' would be 8, not 7.
>>
>> thanks,
>> -jane
>>
>>>
>>> ...?
>>
>