linux-kernel - Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5

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: <45B59738.3050704@shaw.ca>
Date:	Mon, 22 Jan 2007 23:03:52 -0600
From:	Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>
To:	Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Chr <chunkeey@....de>,
	Alistair John Strachan <s0348365@....ed.ac.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, htejun@...il.com,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, lwalton@...l.com, pomac@...or.com
Subject: Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5

Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> Hm, I don't think it is unhappy about looking at NV_INT_STATUS_CK804.
> I'm running 2.6.20-rc5 with the INT_DEV check removed for 8 hours now
> without a single problem and that should still look at
> NV_INT_STATUS_CK804, right?
> I just noticed that my last email might not have been clear enough. The
> exceptions happened when I re-enabled the return statement in addition
> to the debug message. Without the INT_DEV check, it is completely fine
> AFAICT.

Indeed, it seems to be just the NV_INT_DEV check that is problematic. 
Here's a patch that's likely better to test, it forces the NV_INT_DEV 
flag on when a command is active, and also fixes that questionable code 
in nv_host_intr that I mentioned.

-- 
Robert Hancock      Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@...pamshaw.ca
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/


View attachment "sata_nv-force-int-dev-in-interrupt.patch" of type "text/plain" (1316 bytes)