linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/15] ide: fix UDMA/MWDMA/SWDMA masks

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 03 Feb 2007 19:30:00 +0300
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>
To:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/15] ide: fix UDMA/MWDMA/SWDMA masks

Hello.

Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c
>>>===================================================================
>>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c
>>>@@ -695,9 +695,10 @@ static void __devinit init_hwif_cmd64x(i
>>>      hwif->swdma_mask = 0x07;
>>>
>>>      if (dev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_CMD_643)
>>>-             hwif->ultra_mask = 0x80;
>>>+             hwif->ultra_mask = 0x00;
>>>      if (dev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_CMD_646)
>>>-             hwif->ultra_mask = (class_rev > 0x04) ? 0x07 : 0x80;
>>>+             hwif->ultra_mask =
>>>+                     (class_rev == 0x05 || class_rev == 0x07) ? 0x07 : 0x00;
>>>      if (dev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_CMD_648)
>>>              hwif->ultra_mask = 0x1f;

>>   Hm, well, this doesn't look consistent with the changes in other drivers.
>>This driver asks for explicit hwif->cds->ultra_mask initializers, IMO...
>>   You'd only have to check for PCI-646 revisions < 5 then...

> reworked

    Thanks. :-)

>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/piix.c
>>>===================================================================
>>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/piix.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/piix.c
>>>              default:
>>>                      if (!hwif->udma_four)
>>>                              hwif->udma_four = piix_cable_detect(hwif);

>>   This one also certainly asks for explicit hwif->cds->ultra_mask
>>initializers... Thus almost all of this switch statement could go away...
  	
> Alas doing it now would make the nice DECLARE_PIIX_DEV() macro go away

    Why? Could add another argument to that macro...

> (=> a lot of duplicated code)... could be done in the future...

    Yes, of course.

> Thanks,
> Bart

MBR, Sergei
-
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/