On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 08:25:58AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > arch_memory_failure() but stay on sgx_active_page_list. > > page->poison is not checked in the reclaimer logic meaning that a page could be > > reclaimed and go through ETRACK, EBLOCK and EWB. This can lead to the > > firmware receiving and MCE in one of those operations and going into > > "unbreakable shutdown" and triggering a kernel panic on remaining cores. > > This requires low-level SGX implementation knowledge to fully > understand. Both what "ETRACK, EBLOCK and EWB" are in the first place, > how they are involved in reclaim and also why EREMOVE doesn't lead to > the same fate. Does it? [I'll dig up Intel SDM to check this] BR, Jarkko
