linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/PCI: never allocate PCI MMIO resources below BIOS

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:	Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:06:04 -0600
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@...cle.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andy Isaacson <adi@...apodia.org>,
	"R. Andrew Bailey" <bailey@...mai.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, guenter.roeck@...csson.com,
	"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>, yaneti@...lera.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/PCI: never allocate PCI MMIO resources below    BIOS_END

On Wednesday 28 April 2010 11:14:45 am Yinghai Lu wrote:
> Never mind, for 2.6.34 your patch should be good enough.

Uh, OK.

I'm not trying to be a nuisance, but if there's a machine where
we think there's a bridge window like [mem 0xfed20000-0xffffffff],
I want to fix it, even if you think it's "good enough for 2.6.34."

I was hoping you could specifically confirm that "yes, that AMD
machine was fixed by d558b483d5a," or else give me some more
information that would help me figure out what's going on.

Bjorn

> On 04/28/2010 09:07 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > Yinghai, ping, do you have any more information about this?
> >
> > On Tuesday 27 April 2010 09:11:10 am Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >   
> >> On Monday 26 April 2010 07:41:55 pm Yinghai wrote:
> >> But let's double-check this:
> >>
> >>     
> >>> also find one AMD system:
> >>> [    7.056011] pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xfed20000-0xffffffff]
> >>> ...
> >>> pci assign unassign code could use range like [mem 0xfed20000-0xffffffff] wrongly.
> >>>       
> >> I agree, it's very unlikely that it's safe to put PCI devices all the
> >> way up to 0xffffffff.  I suspect this might be fixed by d558b483d5a,
> >> which computes the end of the bridge window using _MAX rather than _LEN.
> >>
> >> See https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15480#c15 for an example
> >> similar to the one above: we originally thought the window was
> >> [mem 0xcff00000-0xffffffff], but d558b483d5a changes that to
> >> [mem 0xcff00000-0xfebfffff], which matches what Windows found.
> >>
> >> Yinghai, can you take a look at your AMD system again with a kernel that
> >> includes d558b483d5a, and see whether we still have a problem?  If we
> >> *do* still have a problem, please open a bugzilla and attach a dmesg log
> >> with ACPI resource info collected with the debug patch here:
> >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15533#c5
> >>
> >> Bjorn
> >>
> >>     
> >
> >   
> 
> 


--
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/