On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 12:41:42PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 11:29:26AM -0700, Axel Rasmussen wrote: > > @@ -3938,7 +3938,7 @@ static vm_fault_t handle_pte_marker(struct vm_fault > > *vmf) > > > > /* Higher priority than uffd-wp when data corrupted */ > > if (marker & PTE_MARKER_POISONED) > > - return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON; > > + return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON | VM_FAULT_HWPOISON_SILENT; > > If you know here that this poisoning should be silent, why do you have > to make it all complicated and propagate it into arch code, waste > a separate VM_FAULT flag just for that instead of simply returning here > a VM_FAULT_COMPLETED or some other innocuous value which would stop > processing the fault?
AFAIK, He only wants it to be silent wrt. the arch fault handler not screaming, but he still wants to be able to trigger force_sig_mceerr(). -- Oscar Salvador SUSE Labs
