linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Add SATA device to VIA IRQ quirk fixup list

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]

Message-ID: <44B78AFA.80806@gentoo.org>
Date:	Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:15:54 +0100
From:	Daniel Drake <dsd@...too.org>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
CC:	greg@...ah.com, akpm@...l.org, cw@...f.org, harmon@....edu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add SATA device to VIA IRQ quirk fixup list

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Same rationale, but the VIA SATA PCI ID had been submitted before, as 
> well...

OK. So what's the realistic solution?

The best I can think of is something like this (see attachment).

It's not perfect, because if someone inserts a VIA PCI card into a 
VIA-based motherboard, the quirk will also run on that VIA PCI card.
Is there a way we can realistically say "this is an on-board device" vs 
"this is a PCI card"?

This is untested but I'll happily test and work on it further if it 
doesn't get shot down :)
I have only added the southbridges for my own hardware and the one 
listed on the Gentoo bug. I guess there will be more. I also wonder if 
listing the southbridges is the most sensible approach or if other 
devices (e.g. the host bridge at 00:00.0) would be more appropriate?

Daniel

View attachment "via-irq-fixup-sata.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (2410 bytes)