From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1i3hdK-0002nR-DA for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 14:12:16 +0000 Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 16:11:56 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/4] x86/mce: protect nr_cpus from rebooting by broadcast mce Message-ID: <20190830141156.GB30413@zn.tnic> References: <1566874943-4449-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1566874943-4449-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Pingfan Liu Cc: Dave Hansen , Baoquan He , Peter Zijlstra , kexec@lists.infradead.org, Jacob Pan , x86@kernel.org, Michal Hocko , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Drake , Ingo Molnar , Qian Cai , Masami Hiramatsu , Andy Lutomirski , "H. Peter Anvin" , Gleixner , Dave Young , Vlastimil Babka , Eric Biederman On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:02:19AM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote: > v1 -> v2: fix compile warning and error on x86_32 > > > This series include two related groups: > [1-3/4]: protect nr_cpus from rebooting by broadcast mce > [4/4]: improve "kexec -l" robustness against broadcast mce > > When I tried to fix [1], Thomas raised concern about the nr_cpus' vulnerability > to unexpected rebooting by broadcast mce. After analysis, I think only the > following first case suffers from the rebooting by broadcast mce. [1-3/4] aims > to fix that issue. > > *** Back ground *** > > On x86 it's required to have all logical CPUs set CR4.MCE=1. Otherwise, a > broadcast MCE observing CR4.MCE=0b on any core will shutdown the machine. > > The option 'nosmt' has already complied with the above rule by Thomas's patch. > For detail, refer to 506a66f3748 (Revert "x86/apic: Ignore secondary threads if > nosmt=force") > > But for nr_cpus option, the exposure to broadcast MCE is a little complicated, > and can be categorized into three cases. One thing is not clear to me: are you "fixing" a hypothetical case here or have you *actually* experienced an MCE happening while kdumping with nr_cpus < num_online_cpus()? Btw, pls do not use lkml.org to refer to previous mails but http://lkml.kernel.org/r/ Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec