linux-kernel - Re: ieee1394 feature needed: overwrite SPLIT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 15 Jan 2007 14:21:11 +0100
From:	Philipp Beyer <philipp.beyer@...iedvisiontec.com>
To:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: ieee1394 feature needed: overwrite SPLIT_TIMEOUT from userspace

Thanks for your input. My post was based on the (wrong) idea that
the kernel already uses different timeout values per node.

Therefore, having read your answer, I have a different opinion about
how to solve this now.

About your suggestions:
Unfortunately sending an early response and using a secondary register
as indication for completed flash writes doesnt work. In short, the
device isn't able to process packets while writing to flash and an early
answer followed by a period of non-responsiveness might lead to problems
on the windows side.

Also I dont like the idea of having such a big timeout for every bus
transaction. In case of 'normal' operation the device runs fine with
a standard timeout value.

I will now try to work around this problem in userspace basically by
ignoring the timeout error. The correct transmission of the write 
request will already be confirmed by the acknowledge packet, after all.

Philipp Beyer

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/