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, 15 Mar 2010 09:32:05 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> To: Zeno Davatz <zdavatz@...il.com> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [git patches] libata updates for 2.6.34 On 03/15/2010 09:21 AM, Zeno Davatz wrote: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Jeff Garzik<jeff@...zik.org> wrote: >> On 03/15/2010 03:33 AM, Zeno Davatz wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 3:55 AM, Jeff Garzik<jeff@...zik.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 03/09/2010 11:26 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello, Linus, Jeff. >>>>> >>>>> On 03/10/2010 07:12 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Coincedentally, it looks like someone else just reported the same >>>>>> problem, with 2.6.34-rc1. >>>>>> >>>>>> It definitely sounds like a race. READ DMA is a DMA command as the >>>>>> name >>>>>> implies, so that eliminates the possibility of polling-related paths in >>>>>> ata_sff_interrupt (libata-sff.c). >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll flip some of my machines to the icky slow boring piix mode, rather >>>>>> than sexy AHCI mode :) to see if I can reproduce. I have had a feeling >>>>>> that we needed a more sophisticated IRQ handling setup, this may be >>>>>> what >>>>>> was needed. Lost interrupt recovery should occur faster than 30 >>>>>> seconds >>>>>> in any case, and should not require a hard reset if the hardware >>>>>> functions just fine outside of the lost-interrupt / race that just >>>>>> occurred. >>>>> >>>>> Yeap, there is a race condition with clearing which I don't think we >>>>> can solve completely but with some modification I think we can at >>>>> least cover known failure cases. >>>>> >>>>> For longer term, I don't think we can solve this by diddling with the >>>>> SFF registers. The interface is just way too ancient and horrid to >>>>> build anything reliable on top of. I'm planning on implementing >>>>> smarter IRQ storm handling and stepped timeouts for ATA commands. >>>> >>>> A tester on this bug >>>> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15537 >>>> seemed to find success with the patch. >>> >>> Thanks for the Update! >>> >>> I will wait some more and then test rc-2. >> >> Can you test the patch, please? > > Sure. I done: > > /usr/src/linux> sudo patch -p1< teo > patching file drivers/ata/libata-sff.c > Hunk #1 FAILED at 1667. > Hunk #2 FAILED at 1700. > Hunk #3 FAILED at 1718. > Hunk #4 FAILED at 1770. > Hunk #5 FAILED at 1792. > Hunk #6 FAILED at 1801. > Hunk #7 FAILED at 1818. > 7 out of 7 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/ata/libata-sff.c.rej > > Is that the expected outcome? Can I ignore the "failed" output? With 7 out of 7 hunks failing, nothing got modified. Is your source tree an unmodified, vanilla 2.6.34-rc1 tree? Jeff -- 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