linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.25-rc8-mm2: CONFIG_ATA_SFF: panic involving mount_block

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: <480088AD.1040904@garzik.org>
Date:	Sat, 12 Apr 2008 06:02:21 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
CC:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc8-mm2: CONFIG_ATA_SFF: panic involving	mount_block_root
 and down the road

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 04:59:17AM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 03:43:45AM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>>> Pekka fixed SLUB for me, and now core2 box survives up and including to
>>> not finding / :
>>>
>>> Setup is SATA disk with plain old partitions, nothing lvmancy:
>>>
>>> 	/dev/sda2 on / type ext3 (rw,noatime)
>>>
>>> CONFIG_ATA=y
>>> CONFIG_ATA_ACPI=y
>>> CONFIG_SATA_AHCI=y
>>> CONFIG_ATA_PIIX=y
>>> CONFIG_PATA_JMICRON=y
>>>
>>> sda1 is for swap.
>>>
>>>
>>> [    3.920000] NET: Registered protocol family 1
>>> [    3.920000] VFS: Cannot open root device "sda2" or unknown-block(0,0)
>> The winner is partly me, partly git-libata-all.
>>
>> The latter introduced CONFIG_ATA_SFF option and put more or less every
>> SATA and PATA driver under it. The former honestly answered N to when
>> ATA_SFF popped up and failed to check existence of ATA_PIIX and
>> PATA_JMICRON in failing .config .
>>
>> Now raise hands those who knew that your ATA controller is SFF
>> compliant.
> 
> Is there any technical reason why we have to bother users with the 
> ATA_SFF option at all?
> 
> It sounds like a perfect canndidate for being select'ed.

'default y' is appropriate, but option that is used to disable a major 
swath of legacy code unneeded on modern FIS-based SATA platforms like AHCI.

	Jeff



--
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/