linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 07/11] ACPI: acpi_pci_unbind should clean up properly after acpi_pci

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]

Date:	Tue, 9 Jun 2009 13:14:57 -0600
From:	Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
Cc:	Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>, lenb@...nel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/11] ACPI: acpi_pci_unbind should clean up
	properly after acpi_pci_bind

* Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>:
> On Thursday 04 June 2009 05:35:21 pm Alex Chiang wrote:
> > * Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>:
> > >
> > > I have a concern about this change.
> > >
> > > The acpi_pci_irq_del_prt() against dev->bus removes not only
> > > the _PRT entries for PCI function corresponding to specified
> > > acpi_device, but also other _PRT entries for working PCI
> > > devices/functions on the same bus. As a result, interrupt
> > > initialization for those PCI functions would no longer work
> > > properly after that.
> > >
> > > So I think we should not call acpi_pci_irq_del_prt() against
> > > dev->bus.
> > 
> > Thanks for the review. I agree with you.
> 
> I agree that this respun version makes things more the way they were,
> so in that sense, it should do no harm.  But I still have the niggling
> concern that .bind() adds _PRT info for non-bridges, and there's no
> corresponding removal.  There should be some path that makes this
> more symmetric.

Hm, in another forum, you suggested that dynamic PRT lookups
might be a solution, which I kinda like.

So, the plan that I would prefer is:

	a) get this patchset in [and we 'do no harm' here so
	_hopefully_ aren't introducing regressions]

	b) work on dynamic PRT lookups in a future patchset.

Thanks.

/ac

--
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/