linux-kernel - Re: Linux v2.6.22-rc3

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: <466058F8.4050107@pobox.com>
Date:	Fri, 01 Jun 2007 13:35:52 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, Gregor Jasny <gjasny@...glemail.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Linux v2.6.22-rc3

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> I'm about to dive into some heads-down RHEL backporting (whee), so I cannot
>> look at the code in depth this weekend, but here are my basic thoughts:
>>
>> * We knew there would be fallout from the new reset-sequence code, and this is
>> clearly in that category.
>>
>> * It worked before #reset-seq merge AFAICT, which implies the old method of
>> probing -- which included SRST -- worked.
> 
> Well, I don't think it really "worked" before. It apparently always had a 
> bad 30-second timeout (probably because the reset just didn't work at 
> all). It's just that the old code didn't care, and since the identify then 
> worked, it was all good.

<reviews thread again>  Ah, indeed.  I certainly prefer the old result 
to the new one.

With these old PATA devices, device reset is "six of one, half-dozen of 
the other."  Using SRST is the only way to kick some ATAPI devices into 
working: http://suif.stanford.edu/~csapuntz/blackmagic.html#reset

I'm mainly interested in hearing feedback from Fedora 7 damage, before 
making a major decision about the probing code.  If this is a single 
dain bramaged device, we should avoid punishing the majority.  But if 
this is a trend, it warrants careful reconsideration.

The current code already has the IDENTIFY retry stuff, so it sounds like 
restoring the "don't care" part should be enough to restore the older 
behavior.

	Jeff


-
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/