From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86, ras: Extend machine check recovery code to annotated ring0 areas
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:01:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151111110134.GD22512@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151110221134.GC28172@agluck-desk.sc.intel.com>
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 02:11:35PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> That would be tidier ... the inside of the "if" has been gradually growing
> with added recovery paths. I had to fold the mce_panic() line to shut
> checkpatch up.
Bah, I don't take checkpatch seriously anymore. In that case, you
could've left the line stick out, for all I know. Our monitors can do
more pixels since the 1980s I believe. :)
> But I'm not really sure what tolerant==3 people really want here. By skipping
> the recovery code they doom themselves to hitting the machine check again.
Looks like a loop to me, fun.
I guess the user application should be aware of BUS_MCEERR_AR and
not attempt the same access to not cause a loop with tolerant==3.
Alternatively, we can still kill it to prevent the looping...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-11 11:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-09 18:26 [RFC PATCH 0/3] Machine check recovery when kernel accesses poison Tony Luck
2015-11-06 20:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86, ras: Add new infrastructure for machine check fixup tables Tony Luck
2015-11-10 11:21 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-11-10 22:05 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-12 4:14 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-12 19:44 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-12 20:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-12 21:17 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-06 21:01 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86, ras: Extend machine check recovery code to annotated ring0 areas Tony Luck
2015-11-10 11:21 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-11-10 22:11 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-11 11:01 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2015-11-12 4:19 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-12 19:55 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-06 21:08 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86, ras: Add mcsafe_memcpy() function to recover from machine checks Tony Luck
2015-11-12 7:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-12 20:01 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-27 10:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-12-08 21:30 ` Dan Williams
2015-12-08 22:08 ` Luck, Tony
2015-12-14 9:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-09 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] Machine check recovery when kernel accesses poison Tony Luck
2015-11-10 11:21 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-11-10 21:55 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-11 20:41 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-11-11 21:48 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-11 22:28 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-11-11 22:32 ` Luck, Tony
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151111110134.GD22512@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox