linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.22.2 review 06/84] Add a PCI ID for santa rosas PATA controller.

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]

Date:	Wed, 8 Aug 2007 01:39:12 +0200
From:	Chr <chunkeey@....de>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
	Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
	Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>,
	Chris Wedgwood <reviews@...cw.f00f.org>,
	Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@...il.com>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Gaston@...ian64.daheim,
	Jason D <jason.d.gaston@...el.com>, chunkeey@....de
Subject: Re: [2.6.22.2 review 06/84] Add a PCI ID for santa rosas PATA controller.

On Tuesday, 7. August 2007, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> From: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@....de>
> 
> This is commit c1e6f28cc5de37dcd113b9668a185c0b9334ba8a which is
> merged during 23-rc1 window.  Considering the popularity of these
> chips, I think including it in -stable release would be good idea.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@....de>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
> 

I did not receive any complains. I guess it's stable enough for -stable ;-) ...

--- 

Not OT: 

There is another outstanding issue with ata_piix.c.
Intel has never officially supported anything faster than PATA 100MB/s.

But, the ata_piix.c driver "define" the ICH5 & ICH7 as UDMA6 (aka 133MB/s) capable.
[ Well, no one has probably noticed it before, because there is bug in do_pata_set_dmamode... 
Just look at libata_atapiix_enable_real_udma133.patch and you'll see what wrong with it. ] 

Here are Intel's datasheets for the affected chipsets:
ICH5 Datasheet: http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/252516.htm
(See note on page 183: "... the ICH5 supports reads at the maximum rate of 100MB/s.")

ICH7 Datasheet: http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/307013.htm
(See first note on page 190: "... the ICH7 supports reads at the maximum rate of 100MB/s.")

-

They are two different ways to deal with it:

- Either -

1. replace all ich_pata_133 with ich_pata_100. 
   (libata_atapiix_disable_udma6.diff - diff from 2.6.22 )

- Or -

2. keep all ich_pata_133 and fix the bug in "do_pata_set_dmamode".
   (libata_atapiix_enable_real_udma133.patch - diff from 2.6.22) 
   If there are any concerns about the safety of the patch patch: 
   http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/7/6/292 (It was already tested by an Intel employee,
   but I guess a bit more user input is necessary here... )

Both ways have their pros and cons. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to follow this
discussion right now, so here's a: 

Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@....de>
(Just in case, if one of the patches really gets merged!)

Thanks,
	Chr. 

View attachment "libata_atapiix_disable_udma6.diff" of type "text/x-diff" (1651 bytes)

View attachment "libata_atapiix_enable_real_udma133.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (443 bytes)