linux-kernel - Re: CrystalHD driver safe on big endian systems?

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

Date:	Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:32:25 +0100
From:	Leon Woestenberg <leon.woestenberg@...il.com>
To:	"Scott D. Davilla" <davilla@....com>
Cc:	jarod@...sonet.com,
	"Naren (Narendra) Sankar" <nsankar@...adcom.com>,
	"hancockrwd@...il.com" <hancockrwd@...il.com>,
	"jarod@...hat.com" <jarod@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"abraham.manu@...il.com" <abraham.manu@...il.com>
Subject: Re: CrystalHD driver safe on big endian systems?

Hello Scott and others,

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 4:53 AM, Scott D. Davilla <davilla@....com> wrote:
>
> <..> From what I've seen in code, it looks definite little endian based and would need
> a look over regarding byte swap.
>
What parts of the code assumes little endian from what you've seen?

Now, byte swap endianess is one thing, C bitfields in combination with
it, another. I have given it a first shot here (mailer unsuitable for
sending patches), still failed on PowerPC:
http://www.sidebranch.com/crystalhd/

May I suggest we instrument all register access functions with a
printk() of the register being written? Then I can compare little
endian access patterns with big endian, to be sure we get the
bitfields, code assumptions and byte swap correctly.

Regards,
-- 
Leon
--
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/