linux-kernel - Re: regression fixed by using pci=rom

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: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805081842030.2940@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 8 May 2008 18:46:37 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
cc:	Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Gary Hade <garyhade@...ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: regression fixed by using pci=rom

On Thu, 8 May 2008, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> 
> Hm, yeah in many cases we definitely *do* want to try to get the expansion ROM 
> space allocated.  But maybe it should be a lower priority than other BARs...  
> Gary?

The thing is, a lot of these things have been done this way because not 
doing them that way breaks.

We want to allocate expansion ROM space - even if we don't enable it - 
because not doing so will screw up bus sizing etc, and can make it 
impossible to allocate later.

In general, changing PCI allocation strategy is really _really_ dangerous, 
even when it is "right", because it tends to expose a lot of issues where 
something worked just because it was perhaps indirectly causing a layout 
that worked.

So the reason I immediately reverted this is that it was simply totally 
wrong. If somebody cares about multi-node systems, the onus of making 
those work should be on *that*, not on old systems that already work.

Ingo, Thomas: I would _seriously_ suggest that you don't consider the x86 
PCI setup code to be "x86" code. Because it isn't. Not in that sense. Just 
don't take patches to it.

		Linus
--
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/