Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 17 Aug 2022 16:19:40 +0200 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] x86/microcode: Avoid any chance of MCE's during microcode update |
| |
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!
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.
> 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.
> > > Shutdown, shutdown.. There is only 1 MCE no matter how many CPUs you have. > > > > Because all CPUs are executing the loop? Or how do you decide this? > > Fatal errors signaled with PCC=1 in the MCAx.STATUS is *ALWAYS*
What does that have to do with
"There is only 1 MCE no matter how many CPUs you have."
?
That's bullsh*t. Especially if the machine can do LMCE.
> I'm waiting for the results. :-). And if you feel we can merge the > - Patch1 - bug fix > - Patch2 - min-rev id > > I do have the comments from Ingo captured, but I'll wait for other comments > before i resend just those 2 and we can leave the NMI handling to get more > testing and review before we consider.
No, you need to go read Documentation/process/.
I'm tired of having to explain to you how the kernel development process works. You send your set, wait for a week, collect feedback and then you send a new revision.
Not hammer people with patchsets every day.
This is not how that works.
If someone's breathing down your neck lemme know - I'd like to talk to him/her.
Ok?!
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
| |