[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4798B8BA.9090203@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:11:38 -0500
From: Jarod Wilson <jwilson@...hat.com>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
CC: linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kristian Høgsberg <krh@...hat.com>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] firewire: fw-core: react on bus resets while the
config ROM is being fetched
Stefan Richter wrote:
> read_rom() obtained a fresh new fw_device.generation for each read
> transaction. Hence it was able to continue reading in the middle of the
> ROM even if a bus reset happened. However the device may have modified
> the ROM during the reset. We would end up with a corrupt fetched ROM
> image then.
>
> Although all of this is quite unlikely, it is not impossible.
> Therefore we now restart reading the ROM if the bus generation changed.
>
> Side note: The barrier in read_rom(), inserted by patch "firewire:
> enforce access order between generation and node ID" is not necessary
> anymore because the sequence of calls
> fw_device_init() ->
> read_bus_info_block() ->
> read_rom()
> read_rom()
> read_rom()
> ...
> will take care that generation is read before node_id, won't it?
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Based on a quick read through the code path, coupled with empirical evidence,
yes, it appears safe to remove the barrier in read_rom().
Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jwilson@...hat.com>
--
Jarod Wilson
jwilson@...hat.com
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists