linux-kernel - Re: [discuss] "ide=reverse" do we still need this?

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: <20080213082643.GB14098@kroah.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:26:43 -0800
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Dirk GOUDERS <hank@...bocholt.fh-gelsenkirchen.de>
Cc:	bzolnier@...il.com, muli@...ibm.com, discuss@...-64.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	jdmason@...zu.us, linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [discuss] "ide=reverse" do we still need this?

On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 08:54:55AM +0100, Dirk GOUDERS wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > I'm reworking the pci device list logic (we currently keep all PCI
> > devices in 2 lists, which isn't the nicest, we should be able to get
> > away with only 1 list.)
> > 
> > The only bother I've found so far is the pci_get_device_reverse()
> > function, it's used in 2 places, IDE and the calgary driver.
> > 
> > I'm curious if we really still support the ide=reverse option?  It's a
> > config option that I don't think the distros still enable (SuSE does
> > not).  Is this still needed these days?
> > 
> > In digging, we changed this option in 2.2.x from being called
> > "pci=reverse" and no one else seems to miss it.
> > 
> > Any thoughts?
> 
> I remember vaguely that some years ago, we set up a box with four IDE
> disks as a RAID set.  For that purpose, we added a PCI ATA100 controller
> so that each disk could act as a primary IDE device and we were only able
> to boot the system with the option ide=reverse.
> That box has been replaced by some other so I cannot verify it but as
> far as I remember it was a problem with disk numbering between BIOS,
> bootloader and/or kernel.  Also, at that time we used lilo and I am not
> sure if grub would have done better.

Hm, so, to summarize:
  - you needed this option many years ago to get a box to work properly
  - you don't need this today

So, if the option went away, you would not be inconvenienced?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/