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, 5 Jul 2017 01:59:55 +0200
From:   Mason <slash.tmp@...e.fr>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@...madesigns.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thibaud Cornic <thibaud_cornic@...madesigns.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/3] PCI: Add tango PCIe host bridge support

On 03/07/2017 20:11, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

> I don't think there's an easy solution to this problem - and I'm not
> sure that stop_machine() can be made to work in this path (which
> needs a process context).  I have a suspicion that the Sigma Designs
> PCI implementation is just soo insane that it's never going to work
> reliably in a multi-SoC kernel without introducing severe performance
> issues for everyone else.

If I remember correctly, this is the second HW block from
tango that has been deemed "too insane for Linux".

The first one was the DMA engine, which doesn't interrupt
when a transfer is done, but when a new transfer may be
programmed. (Though there is a simple work-around for
this one, if we give up command pipelining.)

Do larger SoC vendors have HW devs working closely with
Linux devs, to avoid these design bloopers?

Regards.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ