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:	Fri, 14 Jul 2006 21:28:40 +0200
From:	Edgar Hucek <hostmaster@...soft.at>
To:	Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@...puserve.com>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix boot on efi 32 bit Machines [try #4]

Rajesh's patch does not solve my problem. Actually i work on a force patch.

cu

Edgar

Chuck Ebbert schrieb:
> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607131507220.5623@...osdl.org>
> 
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 15:15:21 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
>>> From kernel 2.6.16 to kernel 2.6.17 a new check is made.
>>> File arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c -> funktion pci_mmcfg_init -> check e820_all_mapped
>>> The courios thing is that this check will always fail on the
>>> Intel Macs booted through efi. Parsing of the ACPI_MCFG table
>>> returns e0000000 for the start. But this location is
>>> not in the memory map which the efi firmware have :
>>> BIOS-EFI: 00000000e00f8000 - 00000000e00f9000 (reserved)
>> It _sounds_ like you may not have converted all the EFI types 
>> (EFI_UNUSABLE_MEMORY?), but regardless, I think it would be fine to have 
>> perhaps a "PCI_FORCE_MMCONF" flag that avoided that sanity check, and then 
>> you could have some code (either the EFI code _or_ some DMI code) that 
>> sets it for the Intel Macs.
>>
>> Note that the check in pci_mmcfg_init() shouldn't be some EFI hack itself, 
>> it would be a real flag for the PCI subsystem, independently of EFI (I can 
>> see it being useful for a kernel command line option, even), and the only 
>> EFI connection would be that perhaps the EFI code ends up setting that 
>> flag (especially if there is some EFI command for doing this).
>>
>> Btw, if you do do this, I think we should make sure that the MMCONFIG base 
>> address is reserved in the PCI MMIO resource structures (which we don't do 
>> now, I think - part of the whole point of verifying that it's marked as 
>> E820_RESERVED is exactly the fact that otherwise we migth have problems 
>> with PCI MMIO resource allocations allocating a regular PCI resource over 
>> the MMCONFIG space..)
> 
> I just reposted Rajesh's patch for this (fixed the one previous complaint
> from the list.)
> 
>  Subj:  [patch, take 3] PCI: use ACPI to verify extended config space on x86
> 
> Edgar, can you get it and test?
> 
> Discussion should probably continue in that thread...
> 

-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ