public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
To: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	LKML Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	X86-kernel <x86@kernel.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
	Jacon Jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] x86/microcode: Avoid any chance of MCE's during microcode update
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 07:23:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <25456937-8034-2742-4a8a-68fb83b37ea2@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yv0D88jxFkXcc18o@araj-dh-work>

On 8/17/22 08:06, Ashok Raj wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 04:19:40PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 12:30:49PM +0000, Ashok Raj wrote:
>>> You will find out when system returns after reboot and hopefully wasn't
>>> promoted to a cold-boot which will loose MCE banks.
>> Not good enough!
> I probably misread your question.. are you suggesting we add some WARN when
> we initiate late_load? I thought you were asking if the HW must signal
> something and OS should log when an MCE happens if MCIP=1
>
>
>> This should issue a warning in dmesg that a potential MCE while update
>> is running would cause a lockup. That is if we don't disable MCE around
>> it.
>>
>> If we decide to disable MCE, it should say shutdown.
> Ok, that clarifies it.. "IF we choose to set MCIP=1, we should tell users
> that hell can break loose, get under the table" :-)
>
>>> Meaning deal with the effect of a really rare MCE. Rather than trying to
>>> avoid it. Taking the MCE is more important than finishing the update,
>>> and loosing what the error signaled was trying to convey.
>> Right now I'm inclined to not do anything and warn of a potential rare
>> situation.
> Encouraging.. So I'll drop that patch from the list next time around.


If I followed all this correctly, I agree. If we set MCIP to force a 
crash if we get MCE, then we are guaranteed to crash.  If we don't, then 
we might crash.


An imperfect alternative would be to set a (percpu?) flag that we're 
doing a ucode update and then detect that flag early in the MCE handler 
and warn very loudly.  This seems like it will give us the best chance 
of getting a useful diagnostic.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-08-29 14:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-17  5:11 [PATCH v3 0/5] Making microcode late-load robust Ashok Raj
2022-08-17  5:11 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] x86/microcode/intel: Check against CPU signature before saving microcode Ashok Raj
2022-08-17  7:43   ` Ingo Molnar
2022-08-17 10:45     ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-19 10:24   ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-23 11:13     ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-24 19:27       ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-25  3:27         ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-26 16:24           ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-26 17:18             ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-26 17:29               ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-17  5:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] x86/microcode/intel: Allow a late-load only if a min rev is specified Ashok Raj
2022-08-17  7:45   ` Ingo Molnar
2022-08-19 11:11   ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-23  0:08     ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-24 19:52       ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-25  4:02         ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-26 12:09           ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-17  5:11 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] x86/microcode: Avoid any chance of MCE's during microcode update Ashok Raj
2022-08-17  7:41   ` Ingo Molnar
2022-08-17  7:58     ` Ingo Molnar
2022-08-17  8:09       ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-17 11:57         ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-17 12:10           ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-17 12:30             ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-17 14:19               ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-17 15:06                 ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-29 14:23                   ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2022-08-17 11:40     ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-17  5:11 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] x86/x2apic: Support x2apic self IPI with NMI_VECTOR Ashok Raj
2022-08-17  5:11 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] x86/microcode: Place siblings in NMI loop while update in progress Ashok Raj
2022-08-30 19:15   ` Andy Lutomirski

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=25456937-8034-2742-4a8a-68fb83b37ea2@kernel.org \
    --to=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=jacob.jun.pan@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
    --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