On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:45:49AM -0500, Alex G. wrote:
>
>
> On 05/11/2018 10:39 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:33:51PM -0500, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote:
> >> ghes_severity() is a misnomer in this case, as it implies the severity
> >> of the entire GHES structure. Instead, it maps one CPER value to a
> >> monotonically increasing number.
> >
> > ... as opposed to CPER severity which is something else or what is this
> > formulation trying to express?
> >
>
> CPER madness goes like this:
Let's slow down first. Why is it a "CPER madness"? Maybe this is clear
in your head but I'm not in it.
> 0 - Recoverable
> 1 - Fatal
> 2 - Corrected
> 3 - None
If you're quoting this:
enum {
CPER_SEV_RECOVERABLE,
CPER_SEV_FATAL,
CPER_SEV_CORRECTED,
CPER_SEV_INFORMATIONAL,
};
that last 3 is informational.
> As you can see, the numbering was created by crackmonkeys. GHES_* is an
> internal enum that goes up in order of severity, as you'd expect.
So what are you trying to tell me - that those CPER numbers are not
increasing?!
Why does that even matter?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
