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: <480157B9.90801@gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 13 Apr 2008 09:45:45 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
CC:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...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

Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> Now raise hands those who knew that your ATA controller is SFF
>>> compliant.

/me raises a hand.

>> 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.

Heh.. yeah, but I have to admit SFF support is cryptic.  We can 
definitely use some friendly explanation there.

-- 
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/