linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based port 0x80 I/O delay override

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: <20071230160817.GB32752@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Sun, 30 Dec 2007 17:08:17 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>, dpreed@...d.com,
	Islam Amer <pharon@...il.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, hpa@...or.com,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based port 0x80 I/O delay override

On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 02:05:44PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> 
> > > drivers that then are shown to really need it could use their *own* 
> > > ports.
> > 
> > The i8259 driver uses it and it is known to be needed on some old 
> > chipsets. But it doesn't really have any "own" ports to use afaik.
> 
> we'll solve that via an i8259-specific quirk. That is a lot cleaner and 
> maintainable than the current generic, always-enabled "opt out" 
> port-0x80 quirk.

You mean using pci quirks + udelay? Will be probably challenging to collect
PCI-IDs for that. And there might be old systems needing it without PCI.
They likely won't have DMI either.

In theory you could make it a DMI year cut off of course (and assume old
if no DMI, although that happens occasionally with new systems too); but
that is generally considered ugly.

I don't think it's a big problem to keep delays of some form by default in 8259 --
people who care about performance should be definitely using APIC mode instead.

-Andi
--
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/