linux-kernel - Re: Regression in ACPI in 2.6.31-rc5

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <86802c440910052138i211dce8apd50cc3558b24de44@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 5 Oct 2009 21:38:40 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Cc:	Ricardo Jorge da Fonseca Marques Ferreira <storm@...49152.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	Yannick Roehlly <yannick.roehlly@...e.fr>,
	Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@...el.com>,
	Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, x86@...nel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Regression in ACPI in 2.6.31-rc5

Len Brown wrote:
> From: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] Revert "x86/pci: remove rounding quirk from e820_setup_gap()"
>
> This reverts commit 5d423ccd7ba4285f1084e91b26805e1d0ae978ed.
>
> because it caused multiple regressions in 2.6.31-rc1
>
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13940
>
> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
> ---
>
> Yinghai,
> is there a reason we should not revert the offending patch, per below?

that patch is introduced fix another bug to get enough resource.

and that patch looks like reveal some bug in ACPI (?) because when
apci subsystem is enabled,
some BARs of some pci devices get cleared somehow.

actually there is patch that could workaround the problem too

---
 arch/x86/kernel/e820.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
@@ -1378,8 +1378,8 @@ static unsigned long ram_alignment(resou
 	if (mb < 16)
 		return 1024*1024;

-	/* To 32MB for anything above that */
-	return 32*1024*1024;
+	/* To 64MB for anything above that */
+	return 64*1024*1024;
 }

 #define MAX_RESOURCE_SIZE ((resource_size_t)-1)

but Linus wants to know why those BARs get cleared, and who is using
that extra 32M.

It seems some guys request acpidump from the reporter, and not sure
what is the result from their checking.
or need the reporter to boot with acpi.debug_layer=0x400000
acpi.debug_level=0x04000807
to pull out more result?

YH
--
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/