netdev - Re: [PATCH] [arch-x86] Allow SRAT integrity check to be skipped

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: <4C869AA3.6000103@zytor.com>
Date:	Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:03:47 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Peter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [arch-x86] Allow SRAT integrity check to be skipped

On 09/07/2010 12:38 PM, Peter P Waskiewicz Jr wrote:
> 
> It's one SKU of a Nehalem-EX system.  The BIOS for that SKU has an issue
> with resolving SRAT hotplug enumeration, and screws up the table.  Other
> SKU's of this same platform do not have the issue.  Efforts are underway
> to get this BIOS fixed, but in the meantime, there's nothing for users
> to work around the bug (aside from disabling memory hotplug in the
> BIOS).  Another platform almost shipped with the same symptoms, but
> caught it and had it fixed before it shipped (didn't catch it early
> because Windows wasn't failing, and most of the testing on that platform
> was done under Windows).
> 
> I agree with Andi that adding DMI strings would be overkill and would
> leave clutter once the BIOS is fixed.  I look at this patch as a
> stop-gap measure for people to fall back on until a newer BIOS is
> available to correct the NUMA enumeration issues.  Without it, we have
> nothing to point users to when they run into this, waiting for a new
> BIOS.
> 

No, this is exactly the kind of stuff for which a DMI match is ideal.  A
specific system with bounded propagation of the problem.  Thus, the DMI
match acts as a whitelist -- "we know this system and it is safe to
activate this hack on it."  This is a very good thing.

If this is a production BIOS it should have this information.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html