| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:41:43 +0200 From: Manohar Vanga <manohar.vanga@...n.ch> To: Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@...com> CC: <gregkh@...e.de>, <cota@...ap.org>, <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: vme: allow explicit assignment of bus numbers Hey Martyn, > I'm sorry, I'm still simply not convinced by this patch: > > 1) For a single bus driver (i.e. in the situation where we have 2 bridges of > the same type), the numbering of the buses is still dependent on the order > that they are found in the scan. Yes this is still a bug. But this patch doesn't address this case. > 2) If the bridge drivers are loaded as modules, I have a feeling they will be > loaded sequentially and therefore the order of the bridges would only change > if the order of the loading of the drivers changed. And this is a major problem when it comes to multiple bridges of differing types. What I'm saying is that this patch simply fixes this one problematic case. We can move this out as soon as we have a more robust implementation. As of now however, I think applying this is useful as we have a decent workaround to the problem. If you want I can make the fact of it being applicable only to cases with differing bridges explicit in the commit message. -- /manohar -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists