linux-kernel - Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5

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, 22 Jan 2007 17:12:40 +0100
From:	Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>
To:	Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>
Cc:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Chr <chunkeey@....de>,
	Alistair John Strachan <s0348365@....ed.ac.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, htejun@...il.com,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, lwalton@...l.com, pomac@...or.com
Subject: Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5

On 2007.01.21 18:17:01 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> >On 2007.01.21 13:58:01 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> >>Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> >>>All kernels were bad using that approach. So back to square 1. :/
> >>>
> >>>Björn
> >>>
> >>OK guys, here's a new patch to try against 2.6.20-rc5:
> >>
> >>Right now when switching between ADMA mode and legacy mode (i.e. when 
> >>going from doing normal DMA reads/writes to doing a FLUSH CACHE) we just 
> >>set the ADMA GO register bit appropriately and continue with no delay. 
> >>It looks like in some cases the controller doesn't respond to this 
> >>immediately, it takes some nanoseconds for the controller's status 
> >>registers to reflect the change that was made. It's possible that if we 
> >>were trying to issue commands during this time, the controller might not 
> >>react properly. This patch adds some code to wait for the status 
> >>register to change to the state we asked for before continuing.
> >
> >Just got two exceptions with your patch, none of the debug messages were
> >issued.
> >
> >Björn
> 
> Hmm, another miss, apparently.. Has anyone tried removing these lines
> >from nv_host_intr in 2.6.20-rc5 sata_nv.c and see what that does?
> 
>     /* bail out if not our interrupt */
>     if (!(irq_stat & NV_INT_DEV))
>         return 0;

Running a kernel with the return statement replace by a line that prints
the irq_stat instead.

Currently I'm seeing lots of 0x10 on ata1 and 0x0 on ata2.

Björn
-
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/