linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] nouveau: Acknowledge HPD irq in handler, not bottom half

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:	Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:51:35 -0500
From:	Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
To:	bskeggs@...hat.com
Cc:	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] nouveau: Acknowledge HPD irq in handler, not bottom half

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 17:25 -0500, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 16:32 -0500, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> >> The old code generated an interrupt storm bad enough to completely
>> >> take down my system.
>> >>
>> >> This only fixes the bits that are defined nouveau_regs.h.  Newer hardware
>> >> uses another register that isn't described, and I don't have that hardware
>> >> to test.
>> > Thanks for looking at this.  I'll take a closer look at the problem
>> > today and see what I can come up with too, that'll work with the newer
>> > hardware too.
>>
>> It should be as simple as adding an hpd1 field to the hpd_state and
>> making exactly the same change.  (It would be nice to put the register
>> definitions into nouveau_regs.h as well -- I didn't really want to
>> muck around with a bunch of magic numbers that I can't test.)
> Yes, it is.  I can confirm the problem on another card, but it doesn't
> actually cause any crashes here.  If you can rework the patch to support
> the newer chips too, that'd be great.
>
> As for magic numbers, the register names for those regs are wrong
> anyway.  The joy of reverse-engineering the support.  It doesn't really
> matter if you want to stick to them or go back to "magic" numbers.

That explains why INTR and CTRL seemed backwards :)  I'll leave the
magic numbers for the 0xe07? stuff.

Also, I accidentally dropped the "& enabled_bits" part -- I'll put that back.

Patch to follow after I boot and test it here.

--Andy
--
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/