linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] libata: Forcing PIO0 mode on reset must not freeze system

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <47B0282D.2050703@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:49:17 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, alan@...hat.com, jeff@...zik.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: Forcing PIO0 mode on reset must not freeze	system

Hello,

Holger Macht wrote:
>> In the above example, even the reset sequence itself can cause hang if
>> the hardware is implemented slightly differently.  The reason why
>> set_piomode() locks up but reset sequence doesn't is simple dumb luck.
> 
> Another thing, whether it's poor luck or not, it worked like this than at
> least 2.6.22. And it was _heavily_ tested. The above commit broke it
> between 2.6.24-rc1 and 2.6.24-rc2, which is at least a regression.

Yes, in a sense but the change is in the area where there's no defined
behavior, so I don't think it's a good idea to revert the change here.
Let's concentrate on finding the proper solution.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/