linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 2.6.37] irq: irq and pci_ids patch for Intel DH89xxCC DeviceIDs

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:	Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:32:32 -0800
From:	"Heasley, Seth" <seth.heasley@...el.com>
To:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
CC:	"jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org" <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2.6.37] irq: irq and pci_ids patch for Intel DH89xxCC
  DeviceIDs

>> Some products are defining a range of DeviceIDs rather than one or two
>specific IDs, so these blocks are for catching any DeviceID in the
>range.  I'm certainly open to suggestion for a better way to handle
>these, and I agree that the current way is awkward.
>
>I understand the need to have separate blocks for separate IDs and for
>ID ranges. But all the ranges could be covered by the same block:
>
>	if ((device >= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5_3400_SERIES_LPC_MIN &&
>	     device <= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5_3400_SERIES_LPC_MAX)
>	 || (device >= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_LPC_MIN &&
>	     device <= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_LPC_MAX)) {
>		r->name = "PIIX/ICH";
>		r->get = pirq_piix_get;
>		r->set = pirq_piix_set;
>		return 1;
>	}

Not sure why I didn't do it this way.  Thanks for the help!

-Seth
--
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/