Re: STI architectural question (and lretq -- I'm not even kidding)

[Borislav Petkov]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 06:33:02PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Of course, this does nothing at all to protect us from #MC after sti
> on return from #MC to userspace, but I think we're screwed regardless
> -- we could just as easily get a second #MC before the sti. Machine
> check broadcast was the worst idea ever.

Please do not think that a raised #MC means the machine is gone. There
are MC errors which are reported with the exception mechanism and from
which we can and do recover, regardless of broadcasting or not.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/