linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ghes: Track number of recovered hardware errors

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: <4fbreveuibi7q5nc2v4t3fpaxrgpwfd4f5c3ubfhssidqesax4@n7q4wrdpbfjv>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2025 05:06:47 -0700
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: Shuai Xue <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Alexander Graf <graf@...zon.com>, 
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, Peter Gonda <pgonda@...gle.com>, 
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, 
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>, 
	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>, "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "acpica-devel@...ts.linux.dev" <acpica-devel@...ts.linux.dev>, 
	"kernel-team@...a.com" <kernel-team@...a.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ghes: Track number of recovered hardware errors

hello Shuai,

On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 11:03:51AM +0800, Shuai Xue wrote:
> 在 2025/7/16 20:42, Breno Leitao 写道:
> > That said, Tony proposed a more robust approach—categorizing and
> > tracking errors by their source. This would involve maintaining separate
> > counters for each source using an counter per enum type:
> > 
> > 	enum recovered_error_sources {
> > 		ERR_GHES,
> > 		ERR_MCE,
> > 		ERR_AER,
> > 		...
> > 		ERR_NUM_SOURCES
> > 	};
> > 
> > See more at: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aHWC-J851eaHa_Au@agluck-desk3/
> > 
> > Do you think this would help you by any chance?
> 
> Personally, I think this approach would be more helpful. Additionally, I
> suggest not mixing CEs (Correctable Errors) and UEs (Uncorrectable
> Errors) together. This is especially important for memory errors, as CEs
> occur much more frequently than UEs, but their impact is much smaller.

Yes, I totally agree. This would be even better than my original
solution. Let me spend some time on it and see how further I can go.

Thanks for your opinions,
--breno