linux-kernel - Re: Why do we probe option roms at 2K boundaries?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:08:53 -0700
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Why do we probe option roms at 2K boundaries?

On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 16:13 -0700, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Alan Cox<alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> >> interrogating a data structure stored in option-rom memory.  My initial
> >> implementation involved blindly scanning from c0000 to f0000 in 512 byte
> >> increments.  Neil and others pointed out that this may not be a safe
> >
> > It isn't safe. If you hit certain ISA devices your system will drop dead.
> > OTOH I doubt anyone has an intel matrix raid controller and a WD80x3 on
> > the same box ;)
> 
> Random link from google, slide 21
> http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8/f/98f3fe47-dfc3-4e74-92a3-088782200fe7/TWAR05005_WinHEC05.ppt
> 
> PCI 3.0+ allows 512b alignment, but you must first make sure you are
> on a PCI 3.0+ system.

Thanks, I believe this may be the missing difference between my test
system and Hans'.


--
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/