linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2 1/2] x86: Reserve [0xa0000, 0x100000] in e820 map

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]

Message-ID: <4BC4F287.9000002@oracle.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:39:03 -0700
From:	Yinghai <yinghai.lu@...cle.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Andy Isaacson <adi@...apodia.org>, guenter.roeck@...csson.com,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 1/2] x86: Reserve [0xa0000, 0x100000] in e820 map

On 04/13/2010 03:29 PM, Yinghai wrote:
> On 04/13/2010 02:58 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 04/13/2010 02:42 PM, Yinghai wrote:
>>> On 04/13/2010 02:18 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>>> On 04/13/2010 02:11 PM, Yinghai wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess the real question (which I haven't looked at myself) is if the
>>>>>> E820_RESERVED -> BUSY will cause an explicitly assigned BAR from being
>>>>>> moved.  That's bad, not so much for this particular range, but from BARs
>>>>>> which may be assigned by SMM.  Hacking that up in a simulator
>>>>>> (Qemu/Bochs) and testing it is probably on the to do list...
>>>>>
>>>>> no, if some device BAR fall in that range, it should still use that range, and will not be relocated.
>>>>>
>>>>> will update the change log.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Good, that's what we want.
>>>
>>> the driver for that device later can not use pci_request_region(). because that region is BUSY already.
>>>
>>
>> That's not good (in general - for devices in this particular range it's
>> not such a big deal, but it is potentially really bad for devices marked
>> reserved for them not to be moved.)
>>
>> We have talked about a need to resolve this before.
> 
> current code for mmio that is just below 4g, if some PCI BAR use that range, and those range is falling into E820_RESERVED,
> 
> those range still can be claimed, but driver can not use pci_request_region() later.
should be
but driver can use pci_request_region() later.

> 
> So We still
> 1. rely that BIOS does not reserve the [0xa0000, 0xe0000)
> 2. kernel only reserve the range when we make sure these is legacy device on that range.
> 
> 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/