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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <47850FEE.5000205@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:18:22 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
CC:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	"David P. Reed" <dpreed@...d.com>,
	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Rolland <rol@...917.net>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	rol@...be.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based port 0x80 I/O delay override.

Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
>> It's specifically a side effect *we don't care about*, except in the
>> by-now-somewhat-exotic case of 386+387 (where we indeed can't use it once user
>> code has touched the FPU -- but we can fall back to 0x80 on those, a very
>> small number of systems.)  486+ doesn't use this interface under Linux, since
>> Linux uses the proper exception path on those processors.  If Compaq had wired
>> up the proper signals on the first 386 PC motherboards, we wouldn't have cared
>> about it on the 386 either.
> 
>  It was actually IBM who broke it with the 80286-based PC/AT because of 
> the BIOS compatibility -- the vector #0x10 had already been claimed by the 
> original PC for the video software interrupt call (apparently against 
> Intel's recommendation not to use low 32 interrupt vectors for such 
> purposes), so it could not have been reused as is for FP exception 
> handling without breaking existing software.  I suppose a more complicated 
> piece of glue logic could have been used along the lines of what 
> eventually went into the i486, but presumably the relatively low level of 
> integration of the PC/AT made such additional circuits hard to justify 
> even if it indeed was considered.
> 

Supposedly the reason was that the DOS-less "cassette BASIC" delivered 
by Microsoft used all the INT instructions except the reserved ones as a 
weird bytecode interpreter.  Bill Gates was fond of that kind of hacks.

	-hpa
--
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/