linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH RESEND V2 1/2] x86/mce: Fix missing address mask in recovery for errors in TDX/SEAM non-root mode

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: <SJ1PR11MB60833C7AE2FA8D8200EA3645FC30A@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 18:03:29 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: "Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Yazen Ghannam
	<yazen.ghannam@....com>
CC: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
	<pbonzini@...hat.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>, "Annapurve,
 Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "Thomas
 Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "Edgecombe, Rick P"
	<rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Chatre,
 Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, "Li, Xiaoyao" <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>,
	"tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com" <tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com>,
	"binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "Weiny, Ira"
	<ira.weiny@...el.com>, "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, "Du,
 Fan" <fan.du@...el.com>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Gao, Chao"
	<chao.gao@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH RESEND V2 1/2] x86/mce: Fix missing address mask in
 recovery for errors in TDX/SEAM non-root mode

> For struct mce?  Maybe that should be 2 new fields:
>
>	__u64 addr;		/* Deprecated */
>	...
>	__u64 mci_addr;		/* Bank's MCi_ADDR MSR */
>	__u64 phys_addr;	/* Physical address */

Would "addr" keep the current (low bits masked, high bits preserved) value?

-Tony