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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 01:27:21 -0700 From: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net> To: Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de> Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, bob.picco@...com, venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com, Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.26-git] /dev/hpet - fixes and cleanup On Monday 28 July 2008, Clemens Ladisch wrote: > > + /* FIXME this may trash both the system clocksource and > > + * the current clock event device! Use HPET_TN_SETVAL > > + * instead, like arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c does ... never > > + * modify the counter, ever. > > + */ > > m = read_counter(&hpet->hpet_mc); > > write_counter(t + m + hpetp->hp_delta, &timer->hpet_compare); > > This comment seems to assume that the code below modifies the main > counter, which it doesn't. There's only one counter. How could it not modify that? Oh ... I see. It's called write_counter() but doesn't actually write the counter. Likewise, read_counter() is not actually reading the counter. Gaack ... So that's not really an issue (good!). I'll strike that comment, except to comment that it's explicitly not modifying any counter (just a hidden write-only accumulator) ... but those silly function names should really be changed so they have a less tenuous connection with reality. In fact, most places would be better off just hard-wiring 32-bit access... > Additionally, HPET_TN_SETVAL has the same > value as Tn_VAL_SET_CNF_MASK (from <linux/hpet.h>), which _is_ used. OK, I can see that too. This HPET stuff is really a lot dirtier than I had expected ... there's no reason at all to have two separate headers with two incompatible sets of definitions for the same registers!! Any comments on the rest? - Dave -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists