linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 05/20] x86/mce: Cleanup bank processing on init

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: <20250826134754.GA337914@yaz-khff2.amd.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 09:47:54 -0400
From: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
	Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@....com,
	Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>,
	Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/20] x86/mce: Cleanup bank processing on init

On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 02:35:03PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 05:33:02PM +0000, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> > From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
> > 
> > Unify the bank preparation into __mcheck_cpu_init_clear_banks(), rename
> > that function to what it does now - prepares banks. Do this so that
> > generic and vendor banks init goes first so that settings done during
> > that init can take effect before the first bank polling takes place.
> > 
> > Move __mcheck_cpu_check_banks() into __mcheck_cpu_init_prepare_banks()
> > as it already loops over the banks.
> > 
> > The MCP_DONTLOG flag is no longer needed, since the MCA polling function
> > is now called only if boot-time logging should be done.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
> 
> Yeah, when you send someone else's patch, you need to add your SOB underneath.
> I'll add it now.

Thanks. Sorry I didn't think of it that way, since it was posted to the
mailing list and I was just including it. I was thinking SOB was for
submitting on another person's behalf.

But I see how any inclusion counts:
"Any further SoBs (Signed-off-by:'s) following the author's SoB are from
people handling and transporting the patch..."

Thanks again.

-Yazen