linux-kernel - Re: SATA resume slowness, e1000 MSI warning

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: <20070312043509.GC19601@mellanox.co.il>
Date:	Mon, 12 Mar 2007 06:35:09 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...lanox.co.il>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org,
	Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>
Subject: Re: SATA resume slowness, e1000 MSI warning

> Quoting Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>:
> Subject: Re: SATA resume slowness, e1000 MSI warning
> 
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...lanox.co.il> writes:
> 
> > OK I guess. I gather we assume writing read-only registers has no side effects?
> > Are there rumors circulating wrt to these?
> 
> I haven't heard anything about that, and if we are writing the same value back
> it should be pretty safe.
> 
> I have heard it asserted that at least one version of the pci spec
> only required 32bit accesses to be supported by the hardware.  One of
> these days I will have to look that and see if it is true.

Maybe. But surely before the PCI-X days.

> I do know
> it can be weird for hardware developers to support multiple kinds of
> decode.

Is this the only place where Linux uses pci_read_config_word/pci_read_config_dword?
I think such hardware will be pretty much DOA on all OS-es.  Why don't we wait
and see whether someone reports a broken config?

> As I recall for pci and pci-x at the hardware level the only
> difference in between 32bit transactions and smaller ones is the state
> of the byte-enable lines.

True, and same holds for PCI-Express.

So let's assume hardware implements RO correctly but ignores the BE bits -
nothing bad happens then, right?

-- 
MST
-
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/