linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/9] x86/mce: Unify AMD DFR handler with MCA Polling

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: <20240604111847.GSZl74F8Q6J4OTI-ev@fat_crate.local>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 13:18:47 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
Cc: linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	tony.luck@...el.com, x86@...nel.org, avadhut.naik@....com,
	john.allen@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] x86/mce: Unify AMD DFR handler with MCA Polling

On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 10:56:39AM -0500, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> -/*
> - * We have three scenarios for checking for Deferred errors:
> - *
> - * 1) Non-SMCA systems check MCA_STATUS and log error if found.
> - * 2) SMCA systems check MCA_STATUS. If error is found then log it and also
> - *    clear MCA_DESTAT.
> - * 3) SMCA systems check MCA_DESTAT, if error was not found in MCA_STATUS, and
> - *    log it.
> - */

I don't like it when you're killing those written down rules. Are they
not true anymore?

Because smca_log_poll_error() still does exactly that.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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